Ferguson Rally in VA?

The Truth said:

.... There's been no verdict, there was no trial of Mike Brown, and you've all got your minds made up. DAMN THEM FOR PROTESTING! They should like the taste of the boot by now, eh?

You guys are right that this might not be about race for everyone. For a lot of blacks it is about race. You don't have to accept that but you should respect that. As I said, for me, it's about statism/antistatism. It's about the right to a fair trial and most of all it's about excessive police force. Screw Sharpton and Jackson, it's not even about them. All they do is stoke a fire that already exists.

Click to expand...

1 - Brown did not get a trial because he is alleged to have done things that resulted in the use of deadly force. The Grand Jury is now considering if there is enough evidence to support that contention.

2 - The point is that it is, and always has been, about race. Please read rant my #32,197 for my discussion about that.

3 - If the Grand Jury finds that Wilson shot Brown because Brown was black then that problem will be addressed. Right now there is a question of whether or not the facts will support such an allegation.

4 - If it is about excessive force then I expect you to apply the same rules and qualifications you would impose on the police to your own behavior regarding self defense. Your posts and your private conversations with me do not support that happening.

5 - What about the elephant in the room? The one sitting on the 800-pound gorilla? A) - some of the folks planning and organizing demonstrations have labled them as protests - as if they know what the Grand Jury decision will be and are opposed to it. B) some of the folks planning and organizing these events are openly calling for rioting and looting. Some are calling for that regardless of what the Grand Jury decision is.

6 - Maybe I'm interpreting things a bit differently, but what I have been reading is discussions of what should happen if these demonstrations, or any individuals at the demonstrations, violates the law. Yes, there has been mention of having a significant police presence but I don't recall anybody advocating that the cops just roll up and start giving them a taste of the boot before anything happens.

7 - You may desire to attend one of the demonstrations as a protest against statism. Do you honestly believe that your protest - one significantly different from what everybody else is protesting, will even be noticed?

stay safe.

skidmark said:

4 - If it is about excessive force then I expect you to apply the same rules and qualifications you would impose on the police to your own behavior regarding self defense. Your posts and your private conversations with me do not support that happening.

Click to expand...

What on Earth are you talking about? I'd love to see a cite for this one. I've never advocated excessive force in public or private. I'm not even sure why you're mentioning any private conversation.

7 - You may desire to attend one of the demonstrations as a protest against statism. Do you honestly believe that your protest - one significantly different from what everybody else is protesting, will even be noticed?

Click to expand...

I don't care if I'm noticed. Our protest is one in the same. Theirs may be based off of a different concept - racial inequality - but I would gladly stand in protest alongside them even if that cause is not specifically why I am there to protest. I support their right to protest. Just like I'm not allowed to say "all cops are j3rk0ffs" just because some cops thrive off of trolling citizens by trampling their rights, I don't believe all the protesters are lazy, uneducated, unemployed racists either.

And believe me, if I were to protest, I'd have one eye out for violent protest and the other eye out for excessive police force.

The Truth said:

What on Earth are you talking about? I'd love to see a cite for this one. I've never advocated excessive force in public or private. I'm not even sure why you're mentioning any private conversation.

....

Click to expand...

I fear you have things turned around. I was referring to your stated positions on when and under what circumstances you would use deadly force in self defense. Just as a beginning, you have opined that it would not be necessary for the alleged perp to have taken a shot at you before you would do so. You have mentioned such things as hands being deadly weapons.

Officer Wilson has made official statements that his actions were in response to a reasonable belief that he preceived a threat of immediate death or great bodily injury. The question of whether or not that belief was in fact reasonable is before the Grand Jury. If they decide that Officer Wilson's belief was reasonable will you continue to label his actions as excessive force?

I mention private conversations we have had in the hope that your memory would be jogged. If you would prefer to go only on what you have posted that will be fine with me.

stay safe.

skidmark said:

I fear you have things turned around. I was referring to your stated positions on when and under what circumstances you would use deadly force in self defense. Just as a beginning, you have opined that it would not be necessary for the alleged perp to have taken a shot at you before you would do so. You have mentioned such things as hands being deadly weapons.

Click to expand...

I've never claimed hands to be deadly weapons. I even commented on another Ferguson thread with a dictionary entry. As for me saying I would shoot an unarmed person, again, you are mistaken. The only thing I can possibly come up with that you may be referring to is my response to McBeth's teenager and a frisbee comment. If so, my apologies for not turning on my McBeth font.

Officer Wilson has made official statements that his actions were in response to a reasonable belief that he preceived a threat of immediate death or great bodily injury.

Click to expand...

I'd really rather not get into this again. Wilson's statements are just one perspective on the matter. It wouldn't be fair for me to make a judgement without considering all possibilities. The point is we are trusting a GJ to decide, and I don't think GJs are fair.

The question of whether or not that belief was in fact reasonable is before the Grand Jury. If they decide that Officer Wilson's belief was reasonable will you continue to label his actions as excessive force?

Click to expand...

Unless there's video of the shooting I won't likely change my mind. We are talking about deciding whether or not he GOES TO TRIAL for a crime. Not whether he's guilty or not. The only thing that's been proven in my opinion is excessive force. That whole closed thread taught me at least that much. I feel I've toned it down a bit.

I mention private conversations we have had in the hope that your memory would be jogged. If you would prefer to go only on what you have posted that will be fine with me.

Click to expand...

I have no interest in being attacked publicly for something you claim I said in a PM. Feel free to PM me. I urge you.

I've been asked to take this to PMs. Not only no but Hell no!

The Truth said:

You should explain exactly what you're trying to communicate via PM. Let's get to the point here. I don't want you to make me connect any dots, I want you to tell me what it is that concerns you.

Click to expand...

You are the one that seems to want to create dots that needs to be connected. I've been straightforward - you accuse Wilson of excessive force for doing exactly what you say you would do in a similar situation.

As for the rest of the cops that you accuse of excessive force - why don't you lay out in detail how you would have them act. Just remember to put yourself in the midst of an active riot when you decide on rules of engagement. Later on you an explain why you are willing - no, not willing but demanding - to allow folks to assault police, destroy private property, and create an environment that endangers citizens who are not actively involved in their "demonstration".

Alternatively, explain how burning down your neighborhood leads to resolving claims of police action. Or why the organizers have labeled what's going to happen a protest. Will they still protest if Wilson is indicted? Or will they just go home and watch Maury and Judge Judy?

stay safe.

The Truth said:

I've never claimed hands to be deadly weapons. I even commented on another Ferguson thread with a dictionary entry. As for me saying I would shoot an unarmed person, again, you are mistaken. The only thing I can possibly come up with that you may be referring to is my response to McBeth's teenager and a frisbee comment. If so, my apologies for not turning on my McBeth font.

Click to expand...

I beg to differ, but we can raise the point here.

I'd really rather not get into this again. Wilson's statements are just one perspective on the matter. It wouldn't be fair for me to make a judgement without considering all possibilities. The point is we are trusting a GJ to decide, and I don't think GJs are fair.

Click to expand...

So you would rather let mob rule settle the question? Or how about appointing a Star Chamber (pick me! pick me!)?

Unless there's video of the shooting I won't likely change my mind. We are talking about deciding whether or not he GOES TO TRIAL for a crime. Not whether he's guilty or not. The only thing that's been proven in my opinion is excessive force. That whole closed thread taught me at least that much. I feel I've toned it down a bit.

Click to expand...

Apparently you do not understand that Grand Juries only decide if there is enough evidence to support a criminal complaint. Or should every person accused of any crime be sent to trial?

I have no interest in being attacked publicly for something you claim I said in a PM. Feel free to PM me. I urge you.

Click to expand...

Your statements about excessive force, oppression, and now the fairness of Grand Juries deserve to be addressed publically.

stay safe.

Your statements about excessive force, oppression, and now the fairness of Grand Juries deserve to be addressed publically.

stay safe.

Click to expand...

What exactly do you want to know? And why are you unwilling to communicate via PM? I've done absolutely nothing to warrant this type of response.

skidmark said:

1 - Brown did not get a trial because he is alleged to have done things that resulted in the use of deadly force. The Grand Jury is now considering if there is enough evidence to support that contention.

2 - The point is that it is, and always has been, about race. Please read rant my #32,197 for my discussion about that.

3 - If the Grand Jury finds that Wilson shot Brown because Brown was black then that problem will be addressed. Right now there is a question of whether or not the facts will support such an allegation.

4 - If it is about excessive force then I expect you to apply the same rules and qualifications you would impose on the police to your own behavior regarding self defense. Your posts and your private conversations with me do not support that happening.

5 - What about the elephant in the room? The one sitting on the 800-pound gorilla? A) - some of the folks planning and organizing demonstrations have labled them as protests - as if they know what the Grand Jury decision will be and are opposed to it. B) some of the folks planning and organizing these events are openly calling for rioting and looting. Some are calling for that regardless of what the Grand Jury decision is.

6 - Maybe I'm interpreting things a bit differently, but what I have been reading is discussions of what should happen if these demonstrations, or any individuals at the demonstrations, violates the law. Yes, there has been mention of having a significant police presence but I don't recall anybody advocating that the cops just roll up and start giving them a taste of the boot before anything happens.

7 - You may desire to attend one of the demonstrations as a protest against statism. Do you honestly believe that your protest - one significantly different from what everybody else is protesting, will even be noticed?

stay safe.

Click to expand...

One of the best summations of current issues ive read so far in regards to Ferguson. +1

Hory clap! Primus likes something I wrote.

There goes my reputation, such as it was.

stay safe.

The Truth said:

What exactly do you want to know? And why are you unwilling to communicate via PM? I've done absolutely nothing to warrant this type of response.

Click to expand...

I have asked some direct questions of you. If that does not tell you what I want to know I guess it will remain a mystery to you.

Once more, with even more feeling - I'm not inclined to allow you to take this private. I've pretty much said what I think needs saying about most of your more egregious positions. We can agree to disagree.

-end-

How's this:

1 On the subject of Grand Juries and police officers such as Wilson, is it not just a little bit of a conflict of interest that the prosecutor meets with the grand jury without other lawyers or a judge present? It's almost as if there is no check/balance. It's not like a preliminary hearing. As for an alternative, I've not come to that point yet in my thought process. Also, the GJ is not public. Haven't you heard the saying, "The police have investigated themselves and found they've done nothing wrong?"

2 Not all cops are statist goons, no. Corruption happens everywhere. Cops are in a different league when it comes to liberty, and we must trust them with it whether we like it or not, so I hold them to a more critical scrutiny than your average Joe. I see nothing wrong with that.

3 I am not ignorant to the fact that community organizers exist and can be very detrimental to certain situations. This one is no different. Don't let my utopian illusion of standing hand in hand for the good of the common man convince you that I am not aware of these things. Sometimes I try to draw empathy from people in different ways.

4 I never liked the number 4. Even numbers piss me off.

5 I'm pretty sure in the rare event I had nothing better to do on the day of one of these protests if I showed up and realized it was not what I thought it was, I would high tail it outta there. I'm not a complete idiot. I don't demand absolutism per se, but I do hold true to my principles. I like to shake off people on the fringe early and I like progress. Sometimes it hurts.

6 Dad gum even numbers, man...HATE EM!

I didn't realize it was such a surprise that I feel the way I do. I thought I'd been pretty consistent here, and I try to be throughout every aspect of my life. Unlike some here, I'm not just an avatar. I have my faults like anyone, but I can't just fall in line so easily. I have to dig deeper. Maybe sometimes I'll piss people off - like you, skidmark.

I've also gone through all of my sent items to you dating back to when I created my account and upon a quick skim, I've turned up nothing but some not-so-interesting cop stories, a PM regarding gunbroker, a PM regarding OC in the Winter, and a very sincere thanks for being "the man that you are," so if such a statement exists it's already public. The only place I could think it would be would be the old Ferguson thread that got locked or the other aforementioned instance. I WANT you to find an instance if it exists, so that I can hold myself accountable.

I agree with what you are saying for the most part but "let them"? Come on...

Primus said:

But as long as the good protestors stand by and let them then they are just as bad. Also seems familiar.

Click to expand...

"...let them..." Who's going to stop them? Everyone is scared of what may happen - police, law enforcement and National Guard included. And I suspect most if not all the "good protestors".

I agree for most this is NOT about race or Michael Brown. Too many just view this as "opportunity" to take more criminal actions than they may under usual circumstances and think (and likely will) get away with it.

I recall an event on the news during the Rodney King protests - The news correspondent was interviewing (briefly) a protestor. He spoke his piece and then as he started to walk away toward a vandalized store said "I'm going to get me a TV". I don't think this had anything to do with King.

Interesting that the ad mentions X-on-black shootings/killings by "cops/security/racial vigilantes."

X can be anybody, any color.

Security Officers get a dubious reputation. Yes, some of them are armed. No, (in my opinion) they are not a statistically significant percentage of the issue. But they dress like cops therefore prime for defamation.

Racial vigilantes. I'll assume that's code word for any legally armed citizen that might shoot a black (or other non-caucasian) minority for any legal (or illegal) reason.

If any good came from Ferguson I think it was the National focus on "militarization of police."

glockfan said:

If any good came from Ferguson I think it was the National focus on "militarization of police."

Click to expand...

You mean like the focus that happened after Va Tech, or Sandy Hook, or the search for the Boston Bombers, or ....

I know what you are getting at - the questioning by those that have been giving away the military toys about the appropriateness of doing so in the first place, and the ways those toys are being used in the second place.

All in response to blame now being spread farther and wider than the individual cop or police agency. All from the .mil/.gov getting tired of being raked over the coals for selling stuff for scrap (and especially at rediculously low prices) in order to not have all that garbage cluttering up their lawn and driveway. IMHO it would have been better to leave all that junk behind and let the folks of the country we just left figure out what to do with it - especially if we refused to give them spare parts.

What bothers me more than the militarization is the dehumanization of cops. I understand we cannot go back to the days of the neighborhood cop walking a beat, but at one time there was an attempt to get cops out of their cars for at least short periods when they could both get to know and interact with the folks on their beat.

stay safe.

Folks on my Facebook feed are referring to the city as Fergudishu.

DrMark said:

Folks on my Facebook feed are referring to the city as Fergudishu.

Click to expand...

Seems accurate

Where's the riots? I was told there would be riots.

stay safe.

skidmark said:

Where's the riots? I was told there would be riots.

stay safe.

Click to expand...

St. Louis, NYC, Philly, LA, Ferguson..... Happy now?

Idiots screaming for justice as they fire guns and burn innocent victims businesses and loot them.

These animals don't want justice. They want anarchy, but will complain when the police get their act together and shut it down!

OK, I got my riots.

But the chances of the cops getting their act together and shutting it down are even less than me getting back together with the ex-wife.

I spent a good part of the middle 60s - early 70s providing the governmental response to urban civil disturbance/unrest. Dick Daley was a rank amature when it came to getting the crowds to go away. From the 1968 MLK Jr Memorial Weenie and Neighborhood Roast to the 1971 MayDay Great Rush Hour Shutdown, both in DC, with stops for the Hartford Seven and a few other clambakes.

It takes lots of bodies to move "protestors" away, and take down ones who choose not to move. No city seems to have been willing to commit the numbers necessary, and thus have ceded control to the rioters.

stay safe.