Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm upset with the people who look at the violence and looting and say, "Look at these dummies. Who does this? Why do you use violence to solve violence?"
You **might** want to take a step back and look at the whole situation.
Imagine that you have no idea how the legal system works because it has never worked in your favor. Imagine that you don't have a voice at all, or if you do, no one taught you how to use that voice. And imagine if all you hear about is crooked police killing people who look like you just because they look like you. Having said all that, what do you do?
Do you try to use your voice in the legal system? Tough! It's never worked for you, plus you don't even know how to do that.
Do you go to the police station with a gun and shoot them? Of course not, that can land you either dead or...even more dead!
Do you march peacefully? HA! Won't stop people from killing everyone who looks like you. Plus you were NEVER TAUGHT TO USE NON VIOLENCE!
Geez people. Your ignorance shows so brightly.
Those who are violently rioting don't know of any other way to resolve this situation. If there were a better way that would actually lead to change, DON'T YOU THINK THEY WOULD DO IT THAT WAY?
Your ignorance is showing...
Why not go to the library and read a book to learn how the legal system actually works? You act like violence is the only way, it isn't.
When I want to learn something new I read a book or ask someone who already knows about the subject. That's a common sense way to learn. I wasn't taught most of what I know in any formalized setting. I figured it out on my own.
So what you're saying is that the police officer who was confronting someone who fit the description of someone who committed a crime should have called for backup and let the suspect run away because there were two people????? Do you understand that he was investigating a crime at the time and Michael Brown probably realized that he had been caught and didn't want to go to jail? Again and again. Michael Brown had no respect for the law. His demise was his own doing. I can't feel sorry for that. What does it take for people to accept the fact that he owns what he did???????
I would've waited for backup and not confronted them, but then again, I'm a bit of a coward when it comes to this type of stuff - which is why I don't belong in law enforcement. I'd also run the other direction if I saw a bunch of big dudes raping a girl, so go figure.
As both a minority and a taxpayer, I'm really glad we have cops that are willing to do what I couldn't bring myself to do. I'm sure Officer Wilson fired in anger (he had to have some emotion when firing, and at least it wasn't with a smile), but he also fired in self-defense and justice and he has my full support.
I was raised to respect your elders, obey the law, study hard.. and for god's sakes, don't reach into a police officer's car and punch him once, let alone twice!!! There are serious and fatal consequences to suffer for doing things such as these, and the perpetrator only has him/herself to blame.
I'm upset with the people who look at the violence and looting and say, "Look at these dummies. Who does this? Why do you use violence to solve violence?"
You **might** want to take a step back and look at the whole situation.
Imagine that you have no idea how the legal system works because it has never worked in your favor. Imagine that you don't have a voice at all, or if you do, no one taught you how to use that voice. And imagine if all you hear about is crooked police killing people who look like you just because they look like you. Having said all that, what do you do?
Do you try to use your voice in the legal system? Tough! It's never worked for you, plus you don't even know how to do that.
Do you go to the police station with a gun and shoot them? Of course not, that can land you either dead or...even more dead!
Do you march peacefully? HA! Won't stop people from killing everyone who looks like you. Plus you were NEVER TAUGHT TO USE NON VIOLENCE!
Geez people. Your ignorance shows so brightly.
Those who are violently rioting don't know of any other way to resolve this situation. If there were a better way that would actually lead to change, DON'T YOU THINK THEY WOULD DO IT THAT WAY?
Your ignorance is showing...
are you kidding me, who's says this crap?
they dont know any other way? are you kidding me.time to wake up!
Not if you're the media. Nothing brings in viewers like controversy. The media directly benefits from fanning the flames as do social agitators be they Al Sharpton or the KKK.
It's a damn shame. Conflict brings in the ratings.
In my firearms training course one important thing they stressed was if you shoot a gun, you better shoot to kill. Shooting to disarm or stop is not likely for a trained sharpshooter let alone the average civilian and/or police officer and you may/will wind up dead if you shot isn't a kill shot.
Yes, you don't point a weapon at anything you don't intend to destroy. You are also responsible for that bullet once it leaves your weapon. Trying to hit an extremity could result in a bystander getting shot.
I wish we had some better non-lethal options that didn't require close contact.
Those who are violently rioting don't know of any other way to resolve this situation. If there were a better way that would actually lead to change, DON'T YOU THINK THEY WOULD DO IT THAT WAY?
Your ignorance is showing...
So, since our ignorance is showing apparently. Why don't you enlighten us on how rioting would lead to a better change and resolve the situation?
Really? Try Boston, 1974, when schools in South Boston were forced to integrate:
Those weren't black folks attacking white school kids, and the KKK? That be a white thing.
To be specific, those are Democrats in the picture of the KKK - the militant arm of the Democrat party. Not a white thing really, because the white Republicans were busy passing civil rights legislation during that time frame.
You obviously have very little experience with firearms.
What is the largest target area on a body? The torso.
What does a firearm do after being fired? Recoil or "kick" up.
It is difficult enough to be a stationary shooter trying to hit a stationary target. Now imagine a moving shooter trying to hit a moving target factored in with stress/injury/adrenaline.
It's not like the movies where people can be shot in their leg and they immediately stop fighting. You don't shoot and wait to see if the threat has stopped and see if you have to shoot again.
And even if someone was shot in the leg, the bullet could hit the femoral artery and they would bleed out.
Stop believing what Hollywood tells you.
Other countries have managed to figure it out. The two guys who murdered Lee Rigby in England waited for police to arrive and then charged at them, one assailant with a gun and the other with a cleaver. The British police shot and disabled them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
