Most of the police that stepped over boundaries in this situation won't be prosecuted, and most of the extreme elements of the protesters—the people responsible for burning down buildings and looting department stores—won't be prosecuted either. That's not a symptom of corruption or racial prejudice or anything like that, but simply the fact that the situation in Ferguson is one of general chaos. There's no accountability in situations such as what Ferguson is evolving into, whether for police or protesters.

Wherever anyone overstepped boundaries, they should be punished. I have yet to be convinced Darren Wilson did.

Thundercat said
All the tiny details of the situation really don't matter. At all. The law is being broken in both courts. I imagine there are absolutely hood rats taking advantage of the situation but that's due to the fact these peaceful protests, which were at one point peaceful, and at one point protests, have practically escalated into a riot. They are quick to turn this into a racial issue because it is. Mike Brown is innocent. He is absolutely innocent and the proof is almost ridiculous. But that doesn't matter. What matters is the fact that we've gotten to a point where cops are patrolling a city like some kind of private militia, tear gassing JOURNALISTS for christ's sakes and completely ignoring the constitution and foundation of laws, rules and beliefs this country was founded upon. These are not people looking to serve justice. And what's even worse is there will be no justice. Nobody is going to punish these cops for abusing their power. These cops want a reason to pull their triggers. What's even worse is if our founding fathers were hypothetically brought back to life and shown the situation before them they'd be shitting themselves at the sight of so many African American's. This doesn't feel like a country man. It's disgusting. When shit get's real anybody that can do anything will do nothing because it'll merely put a target on their back. It's disgusting.Politicians are irrelevant.

As far as the police abusing their power, I'm sure they are to some extent. People with power have this uncanny habit of abusing it when given the chance after all.

What I want to point out though, are the assumptions everyone makes because they like to take the side of the "victim". First of all, there is no proof whatsoever that completely supports the innocence of Michael Brown, other than opinions, nor is prere evidence that say the cop was in his right. Secondly, this is only a racial issue because people want to make it a racial issue. Everyone just assumes that this cop shot the kid because he was black. Why does race even apply in this situation at all? The story should be " cop shoots teen", not, "cop shoots black teen." Who cares what the color of his skin is?

The fact is, this kid ran back at the cop and he felt threatened so he shot. Was he right to shoot? Who knows? Everyone keeps saying that Michael is such a good kid, when in actuality, he has multiple charges of assault and robbery. I can't bring myself to take a side. There's just too much that we don't know.

Also, the "peaceful protesting" never started as such. To begin with, it was a ceremony for Michael's death held by the family. Then later that evening they burned down a QT and it escalated from there. The actual protesting started when police came to try and calm things down, seeing as people were looting and throwing bricks off of a highway overpass.

So Boerd said
What evidence could you possibly have of that?

It's all over the internet. To put it simply, Mike was accused of robbing a convenient store. The owners of the store denied any such robbery. The police had footage of a black person who was assaulting a woman in ten store. Mike was shot five or six minutes after the "robbery"

Thing is, Mike was about a mile away from the store when he was shot. He was also wearing a different outfit, and the footage was from 2 weeks prior to the shooting. Apparently he robbed a store, changed, then walked a mile in five to six minutes.

If you don't believe me, look it up yourself. But this is what happened. Mike is innocent, Mike is dead, he's obviously not the first and according to Luxx's post more have died already. Welcome to the new america.

Thundercat said
It's all over the internet. To put it simply, Mike was accused of robbing a convenient store. The owners of the store denied any such robbery. The police had footage of a black person who was assaulting a woman in ten store. Mike was shot five or six minutes after the "robbery"Thing is, Mike was about a mile away from the store when he was shot. He was also wearing a different outfit, and the footage was from 2 weeks prior to the shooting. Apparently he robbed a store, changed, then walked a mile in five to six minutes.If you don't believe me, look it up yourself. But this is what happened. Mike is innocent, Mike is dead, he's obviously not the first and according to Luxx's post more have died already. Welcome to the new america.

Sources?

http://youtu.be/n2z5-H8NSGA
http://youtu.be/5Wt8yEGacIs

Looks the same. His own friend admits the robbery.

Luxx said
As far as the police abusing their power, I'm sure they are to some extent. People with power have this uncanny habit of abusing it when given the chance after all. What I want to point out though, are the assumptions everyone makes because they like to take the side of the "victim". First of all, there is no proof whatsoever that completely supports the innocence of Michael Brown, other than opinions, nor is prere evidence that say the cop was in his right. Secondly, this is only a racial issue because people want to make it a racial issue. Everyone just assumes that this cop shot the kid because he was black. Why does race even apply in this situation at all? The story should be " cop shoots teen", not, "cop shoots black teen." Who cares what the color of his skin is? The fact is, this kid ran back at the cop and he felt threatened so he shot. Was he right to shoot? Who knows? Everyone keeps saying that Michael is such a good kid, when in actuality, he has multiple charges of assault and robbery. I can't bring myself to take a side. There's just too much that we don't know. Also, the "peaceful protesting" never started as such. To begin with, it was a ceremony for Michael's death held by the family. Then later that evening they burned down a QT and it escalated from there. The actual protesting started when police came to try and calm things down, seeing as people were looting and throwing bricks off of a highway overpass.

If Mike was white, he would be alive right now. If you can show me a community up in arms about a white teenage death, be my guest.

Thundercat said
If Mike was white, he would be alive right now. If you can show me a community up in arms about a white teenage death, be my guest.

Right, that's why the cop didn't shoot his friend Dorian Johnson? Because he was white?

So Boerd said
http://youtu.be/n2z5-H8NSGAhttp://youtu.be/5Wt8yEGacIsLooks the same. His own friend admits the robbery.

You're looking up proof that he's guilty. Not innocent.

So Boerd said
Right, that's why the cop didn't shoot his friend Dorian Johnson? Because he was white?

Are you trying to say i'm wrong?

Are those videos authentic or not? Is Dorian Johnson a liar?

Thundercat said
Are you trying to say i'm wrong?

Answer the question. Is that why the cop didn't shoot Dorian?

So Boerd said
Answer the question. Is that why the cop didn't shoot Dorian?

I can't answer the question because I'm not the cop dude. I don't know why the cop didn't shoot Dorian, but that literally doesn't matter at all. Dorian being alive doesn't prove me wrong. Michael is dead because Michael is black.

Thundercat said according to Luxx's post more have died already.

Correction, police didn't kill anyone else that night. There were two shootings between only black people downtown that no one cared about. It had nothing to do with the police. My point is that everyone is upset because it was a white man who shot a black teen. Black people kill each other all the time here in the city and no one cares. We're one of the top five murder capitols in the United States. No one cares about stuff like this unless it can be made into a controversial issue, such as race.

Thundercat, it's illogical to make an entirely baseless claim, then defend it with "prove me wrong". You made the claim, the burden of truth is on you. If you believe the shooting was racially motivated, prove it. If you can't prove it, at least explain why you hold that belief.

Thundercat said
I can't answer the question because I'm not the cop dude. I don't know why the cop didn't shoot Dorian, but that literally doesn't matter at all. Dorian being alive doesn't prove me wrong. Michael is dead because Michael is black.

Absolutely it does strengthen the case of the cop. Both Michael and Dorian are black. His story and use of force would be more credible against two unarmed assailants than one. Plus, being racist, two dead black kids is better to the cop than one, correct?

Now let's look at established fact and draw a more likely, less furtive fallacious version of the events.

Fact: Michael Brown robbed a convenience store. Caught on video and confirmed by the same friend who insists Brown was innocently gumned down.
Fact: Michael Brown was engaged by a police officer 10 minutes after robbing a place.

Michael has reason to be scared of the cop, where Dorian, having not participated in the theft, had none. Michael was also physically larger than Dorian. Therefore, it is reasonable for Michael to engage the officer, but not Dorian.

Fact: The fatal shot was to the top of Michael's head and his lower body was untouched.

If the cop started shooting after Michael surrendered, he would be erect, not with his head bent over to near parallel with the ground. Why didn't he run away? His legs were undamaged, so he had the ability even while the cop was shooting. Why not turn around at least?

Luxx said
Correction, police didn't kill anyone else that night. There were two shootings between only black people downtown that no one cared about. It had nothing to do with the police. My point is that everyone is upset because it was a white man who shot a black teen. Black people kill each other all the time here in the city and no one cares. We're one of the top five murder capitols in the United States. No one cares about stuff like this unless it can be made into a controversial issue, such as race.

My mistake

The Nexerus said
Thundercat, it's illogical to make an entirely baseless claim, then defend it with "prove me wrong". You made the claim, the burden of truth is on you. If you believe the shooting was racially motivated, prove it. If you can't prove it, at least explain why you hold that belief.

Do you disagree with me?

So Boerd said
Absolutely it does strengthen the case of the cop. Both Michael and Dorian are black. His story and use of force would be more credible against two unarmed assailants than one. Plus, being racist, two dead black kids is better to the cop than one, correct?Now let's look at established fact and draw a more likely, less furtive fallacious version of the events.Fact: Michael Brown robbed a convenience store. Caught on video and confirmed by the same friend who insists Brown was innocently gumned down.Fact: Michael Brown was engaged by a police officer 10 minutes after robbing a place. Michael has reason to be scared of the cop, where Dorian, having not participated in the theft, had none. Michael was also physically larger than Dorian. Therefore, it is reasonable for Michael to engage the officer, but not Dorian.Fact: The fatal shot was to the top of Michael's head and his lower body was untouched. If the cop started shooting after Michael surrendered, he would be erect, not with his head bent over to near parallel with the ground. Why didn't he run away? His legs were undamaged, so he had the ability even while the cop was shooting. Why not turn around at least?

Do you have proof these are facts?

Before I waste my time finding them for you, if I prove they are facts, would you cease maintaining Brown's innocence? Based on everything I have said, if my facts are accurate, will you admit my version to be more likely?

Thundercat said Do you disagree with me?

I don't agree or disagree with you, I'm just pointing out that "prove me wrong" isn't a valid point to make in any given situation. If you're making an assertion it is your responsibility to defend that assertion with evidence. The necessity to prove a point always lies on the person who is making that point.