Ferguson: Nothing says 'I care' like looting and burning local businesses.

People are nuts sometimes, I tell ya.

No excuse for this kind of stuff to go on. None.

If you need to express anger through violence, grab a sledgehammer and head to the local auto junk yard and start pounding away at some of those cars.

Good grief!
 
Smellin Coffee said:
People are nuts sometimes, I tell ya.

No excuse for this kind of stuff to go on. None.

If you need to express anger through violence, grab a sledgehammer and head to the local auto junk yard and start pounding away at some of those cars.

Good grief!

And evidently, there is some anger, frustration and resentment in the Black community...evidently wide spread.
I don't purport to understand it, but this destructive reaction doesn't help their cause.
And, I would assume that many who instigate of such behavior aren't interested in Mike Brown's death...except as an excuse for this garbage.

The bottom line is that business as usual will assure business as usual.
Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and the liberal Democratic agenda is not the answer or else we'd be in racial Nirvana by now.
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
Smellin Coffee said:
People are nuts sometimes, I tell ya.

No excuse for this kind of stuff to go on. None.

If you need to express anger through violence, grab a sledgehammer and head to the local auto junk yard and start pounding away at some of those cars.

Good grief!

And evidently, there is some anger, frustration and resentment in the Black community...evidently wide spread.
I don't purport to understand it, but this destructive reaction doesn't help their cause.
And, I would assume that many who instigate of such behavior aren't interested in Mike Brown's death...except as an excuse for this garbage.

The bottom line is that business as usual will assure business as usual.
Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and the liberal Democratic agenda is not the answer or else we'd be in racial Nirvana by now.

I agree with you. (Imagine that!) :)
 
Gotta get me some justice. Or at least a new TV.
 
I honestly thought they would indict on involuntary manslaughter.  I don't understand the rage but I work with some of the finest African American folks on the planet that wouldn't harm a fly and they tell me it's a problem with how young black men are viewed by police.
 
Billy said:
I honestly thought they would indict on involuntary manslaughter.  I don't understand the rage but I work with some of the finest African American folks on the planet that wouldn't harm a fly and they tell me it's a problem with how young black men are viewed by police.

Interesting.

Last week, I watched an interview with a former NFL player who had done some time in jail with a DWI among other things. He was in Chicago when he was arrested and the city was celebrating St. Patrick's Day. He said that there must have been 60 - 70 people brought in for either arrest or questioning that he saw and he was the ONLY white guy other than police personnel.  He said the incarcerated were laughing at him as being the only white guy ever to get arrested on St. Patrick's Day.

Granted that is an extremely small sample size but it does make one wonder.
 
Billy said:
I honestly thought they would indict on involuntary manslaughter.  I don't understand the rage but I work with some of the finest African American folks on the planet that wouldn't harm a fly and they tell me it's a problem with how young black men are viewed by police.

The other side of this coin is reflected in that statement, which has been said often on TV interviews.
But, why did you/we think that?
We heard no testimony.
We saw no evidence.

The grand jury saw, heard, evaluated and decided, based on what they knew, that there was no case here.
Should the police officer and his family be dragged through the ordeal of a trial simply to appease those who thought something, based on NO evidence?
 
Billy said:
I honestly thought they would indict on involuntary manslaughter.  I don't understand the rage but I work with some of the finest African American folks on the planet that wouldn't harm a fly and they tell me it's a problem with how young black men are viewed by police.

If Wilson's testimony is correct, and I have no reason to think he's lying, then this isn't about how black men are viewed by police.  Michael Brown was way over the top and attacked Wilson. 

 
By the way, they weren't looting.  They were undocumented Christmas shoppers enjoying black Monday sales. 
 
aleshanee said:
The Rogue Tomato said:
Billy said:
I honestly thought they would indict on involuntary manslaughter.  I don't understand the rage but I work with some of the finest African American folks on the planet that wouldn't harm a fly and they tell me it's a problem with how young black men are viewed by police.

If Wilson's testimony is correct, and I have no reason to think he's lying, then this isn't about how black men are viewed by police.  Michael Brown was way over the top and attacked Wilson.

where was the severe facial injuries including the fractured eye socket that wilson supporters claimed he had?........ i saw close up pictures of his injuries posted and i didn;t see anything serious.... it looked like the result of a couple of slaps... and not even slaps delivered by someone intending to do serious damage either.......zimmermans injuries received at the hands of travon martin were much worse.......... so lies have already been told in defense of wilson on this case........ who is to say more lies weren;t told to the grand jury as well........like i said...... the prosector who was supposed to be presenting him for indictment clearly did not believe in the guilt of the man he was being paid to prosecute..... there is something really wrong there.......

To my knowledge, Wilson didn't say anything about a fractured eye socket.  I'm referring to his testimony to the Grand Jury, at least some of which was published.  Neither of us were on the Grand Jury, so we haven't heard/seen all the evidence.  We're not in a position to say if their conclusion is wrong. 

 
10 Key Facts Ferguson Grand Jury Discovered

“According to some witnesses, Officer Wilson stopped firing when Mr. Brown stopped moving towards him and resumed firing when Mr. Brown started moving towards him again. These witnesses did not make any statements to the media.”

http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/curtis-kalin/10-key-facts-ferguson-grand-jury-discovered

The grand jury heard more than 70 hours of testimony from dozens of witnesses, including toxicology experts, over the past three months before they decided not to indict Wilson.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/evidence-michael-brown-was-high-pot-and-carrying-bag-it
 
We are witnessing what the left wants.

Racism kept alive and USA to be remade.
 
I've been there. It is a racist and dangerous city. It survives on the government's "teat."

Unarmed or not. Do not run at anyone in a threatening manner. You can be shot.

You do not understand the law. A grand jury is the first phase. If you cannot convince a grand jury, there is no legal case to proceed.
 
FSSL said:
I've been there. It is a racist and dangerous city. It survives on the government's "teat."

Unarmed or not. Do not run at anyone in a threatening manner. You can be shot.

You do not understand the law. A grand jury is the first phase. If you cannot convince a grand jury, there is no legal case to proceed.

Have you had a chance to review any of the document dump? At least read the witness statements (some have three different statements, all different). People can wine all they want, there are much better cases to use for police brutality or racism than this one.
 
All we get from you on this is speculation. You have your mind made up that Ferguson has a bad cop.

It isn't rocket science what happened.

9e3b744a029536caed70bdf63ea15642.jpg
 
FSSL said:
I've been there. It is a racist and dangerous city. It survives on the government's "teat."

Unarmed or not. Do not run at anyone in a threatening manner. You can be shot.

You do not understand the law. A grand jury is the first phase. If you cannot convince a grand jury, there is no legal case to proceed.

More evidence is brought before a grand jury than a trial jury. Jurors are free to ask questions to those testifying. There is a lower burden of proof. There does not need to be unanimous agreement. Yeah.... snowball's chance.
 
Back
Top