Not exactly, but that's a cop out given how many people have exaggerated that store video into things like: Brown was a violent felon destined for a life of crime.
Well, he was a violent felon - that cannot be disputed.
Was he destined for a life of crime? Maybe, maybe not. We certainly hear plenty of whining about the "school to prison pipeline" and the "criminalization of black men" etc. - and why do we hear this whining? Well, one of the central premises is that once you're in the system a life of crime becomes one of the most predictable outcomes. Prisoners learn to be better criminals while in prison, having a record limits their options and makes them feel permanently excluded from law-abiding society so they keep increasingly engaging in more and worse crimes, etc.
So, there are plenty of people who would argue that a life of crime is something very easy to lock into, and hard to get out of.
I have no idea how many other crimes Brown was committing on a regular basis which either are on a sealed juvenile record, or he simply didn't get caught/identified for. My guess would be a lot, since in the one tiny window of his life we got a peek into... he had illegal drugs in his system, committed a robbery, two assaults, and possibly even an attempted murder.
But, perhaps that little segment of his life was a bad sampling. Perhaps getting busted for strong-arm robbery and assault on a police officer would've been the wake up call he needed, had he lived, and he would've straightened his life out. I'm personally very skeptical about that, but it's possible.
None of this has anything to do with saying
"him doing the strong-arm robbery justifies Wilson shooting him" - which is something I've yet to see anyone say, but have seen a lot of people pretend others are saying.
How do you square this with the claims that continue saying Brown was threateningly coming toward Wilson?
There are plenty of ways to come threateningly toward someone, lunge at them, etc. without pointing the top of your head at them and bull-charging them. I would suspect the only time someone does that is if they're joking around and want to deliberately do it in a silly way for laughs.
But Skeptic Tank says no one is making the charging with his head down claim.
So, if someone has experience with football then that means they charge people like a bull? Or, if someone points out that he had a football background that means they're asserting he would've charged like a bull?
My understanding is that it's more common in football to charge leading with your arm/shoulder rather than your head. Plow into people with your side, not your head. Does that involve lowering your head somewhat to make yourself more compact and brace for the impact you seek to cause? Sure. But not nearly enough to get your head into the position of those bullet holes, especially the second one.
Him falling, for whatever reason, into those final bullets' trajectory remains our best explanation for those wound locations.
