By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - What do you think really happened in Ferguson?

d21lewis on 25 August 2014

As a black guy and a one time cop, my reaction to what happened in Ferguson is the same reaction I have whenever something like this happens: Wait for the evidence. Sometimes, it's the officer. Sometimes it's the "victim". We'll find out truth. People are always quick to react without getting all of the facts and are then too proud to admit that they were wrong. I've encounter both good and bad police and civilians. It really is too early to tell without both sides of the story.



Around the Network
cannonballZ on 11 September 2014
bobfulci said:

It's this kind of attitude that makes my blood boil. I am assuming you have never been in a situation like the one the police officer was in have you? He had just been beaten in the face so  brutally that his orbital bone was fractured. He pointed his pistol at the young man and ordered him to freeze. Instead of freezing and putting his hands up like most sane people would do when a gun is pointed directly at them, this fine young gentleman decided to rush towards the officer and was SHOT as ANYONE would have been BLACK OR WHITE. I am sure after being assaulted and having a rather large angry person rushing toward you with intent to do great bodily harm as he had previously demonstrated he was capable of doing, the officer thought to himself "gee, I am going ot try to aim in a spot that would only wound him." Right? ...Right? Makes total sense...


Looks like the cop lied:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/10/us/ferguson-michael-brown-shooting-witnesses/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Sometimes people are too quick to take a cops word for it, orbital bone was never fractured either.

Yup, makes so much sense... Right???



JazzB1987 on 11 September 2014
cannonballZ said:
No matter what Brown may have done, the cop was wrong shooting him 6 times.

Why couldn't he just wound Brown?

Brown was unarmed, no need for 6 shots if you were trained to shoot. The cop should be tried for homicide.


You know thats what I ask myself everytime when a cop does not try to shot someones leg/arm whatever. But then how do I know if the cop knew the other guy had no gun? etc? I have no idea how a cops life is at all especially not a US cops'.  If you shoot somones leg he can still shoot you and the one that got shot probably wont think "oh he was nice he just shot my leg I might shot his leg too then"

I was not there so the whole thing is not my problem and If I try to have an opinion on something I have no clue off i would be pretty stupid. (I also have no facts or whatever  since it didnt happen in my country nor can I trust that countries media at all)



badgenome on 11 September 2014
JazzB1987 said:

You know thats what I ask myself everytime when a cop does not try to shot someones leg/arm whatever. But then how do I know if the cop knew the other guy had no gun? etc?

Well, that's not really why. For a number of reasons, cops are only supposed to shoot to kill. For one thing, do we really want to encourage police to go for their guns even more quickly than they do already? That is a distinct possibility if shooting to wound causes the firearm to be seen a means of subduing rather than just killing. Besides, it is wildly unrealistic to expect cops to be able to shoot a target in one of his flailing limbs. Shooting should always be a last resort, and in the event that it is necessary aiming for the center of mass is the most responsible approach because it minimizes collateral damage. Even then things like this still happen.