• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Michael Brown Shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.
I watched CNN and ABC News coverage of this event. Following this thread you don't get a sense of the outrage that exists over the shooting. Though these points are hotly debated here by a handful of posters, in the wider world there is a lot of concern over the following:

Brown was only eighteen. Six weeks ago he was still in high school. He had just graduated and was about to begin college. Brown was guilty of stealing a handful of cigars and bullying the shopkeeper. Many people don't consider that to be a violent felony or Brown to be a violent felon. Many people consider that stealing a handful of cigars and acting like a jerk. He got into an altercation with an officer. The details remain unclear. Despite being unarmed Brown was shot six times. Many people feel there should have been a way a trained and experienced police officer could've subdued him short of shooting him six times and killing him.

African Americans have a long history of being discriminated against and being subject to police violence. Many people feel he wouldn't have been shot six times and killed if he hadn't been black.
 
theprestige said:
epepke said:
Alan Dershowitz pointed out, correctly, that while people may say that it is better to let a hundred guilty go free than convict one innocent, that people don't really think that way for a minute.
Click to expand...


Given that this is obviously a matter of subjective opinion, I don't see how Dershowitz could possibly be "correct", compared to all the people who don't really think that way for a minute.
Click to expand...


If it's subjective opinion then everyone is correct, or rather there is no "correct". (i.e. "De gustibus non disputandum est.)

But it isn't, though (subjective opinion, that is). It may indeed be a principle that a lot of people don't really take to heart, but it is a key principle underlying our system of justice. Nothing subjective about it.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
Yes, she's just claiming he reacted as if he was shot in the back. Totally different than claiming he was shot in the back.

Because to claim she knew he was shot in the back, she would have to see the bullet travel from the gun and enter his body, amiright ? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Okay, perhaps you have the intellectual capacity to respond to this question with something more than a hilarious gif. Others in this thread don't seem able.

How would Mitchell be impeached as a witness for the claim she made regarding seeing Brown's body jerk?
 
newyorkguy said:
I watched CNN and ABC News coverage of this event. Following this thread you don't get a sense of the outrage that exists over the shooting. Though these points are hotly debated here by a handful of posters, in the wider world there is a lot of concern over the following:

Brown was only eighteen. Six weeks ago he was still in high school. He had just graduated and was about to begin college. Brown was guilty of stealing a handful of cigars and bullying the shopkeeper. Many people don't consider that to be a violent felony or Brown to be a violent felon. Many people consider that stealing a handful of cigars and acting like a jerk. He got into an altercation with an officer. The details remain unclear. Despite being unarmed Brown was shot six times. Many people feel there should have been a way a trained and experienced police officer could've subdued him short of shooting him six times and killing him.

African Americans have a long history of being discriminated against and being subject to police violence. Many people feel he wouldn't have been shot six times and killed if he hadn't been black.
Click to expand...
With regards to the " disturbances in Ferguson " thread, the historical animosity between the police and African American community has a great deal of relavence.

Within the " shooting of Michael Brown " thread, not so much, maybe?
 
Again, from watching CNN and ABC News coverage of this event:

The Ferguson Police Department's reputation and history are a concern. The fact they left Brown's body in the street for hours troubles people. This despite the fact within an hour of the shooting a crowd had gathered and some were demanding that the police show some respect and sensitivity to the community. The military-style response to the protests is troubling. One CNN corespondent who had recently returned from an assignment in the Middle East said he was astounded at the police response on the streets of Ferguson. It was beyond what he saw on the Gaza strip.

Police have fired tear gas and rubber bullets at peaceful marchers. One woman in her fifties who was marching was struck with a rubber bullet last night. A news reporter accompanied her to the police lines to seek help. The woman, who was black, was afraid to approach the police alone. The reporter considered that fear reasonable given the anger he had been hearing police officers express towards the demonstrators, not just the people breaking the law, but towards people peacefully protesting. There is no question these people have the right to protest. They should protest. A lot of people feel Ferguson is broken and needs to be fixed.
 
Breaking news from BBC

Benjamin Crump the families lawyer, states that Michael Brown was shot "at least 6 times".
 
Last edited:
LTC8K6 said:
Who is Davis?

Wilson may just be a poor shot. They are trained to aim for center mass and we have no shots anywhere near center mass. High stress tends to make people shoot poorly.

Wilson may have been punched in the eye/face, making his aim poor.

Many handgun sights are secured in a dovetail and are drift adjustable for windage. If the gun was banged around at the car, one of the sights could have moved.
Click to expand...


If he hit the guy six times out of eight or so (maybe?) while the dude was 35 ft. away and moving then I don't see how anyone can call him a bad shot unless they think Annie Oakley was average.

Real life is a lot different than TV shootouts. From the stats I've seen the average hit rate for cops while engaged with a suspect is about 15%. (And I think that was usually quite a bit closer than 35 ft.)

The arm shots were pretty close to center mass, and if the guy's head was down when he got hit in the head then those shots were (if you'll excuse the expression) dead-on center mass.

If there really was anything to throw his aim off then that just means he was an even better shot.

Wilson may or may not be guilty of some things, but poor marksmanship ain't one of 'em. I sure wouldn't want him shooting at me.
 
Last edited:
quadraginta said:
If he hit the guy six times out of eight or so (maybe?) while the dude was 35 ft. away and moving then I don't see how anyone can call him a bad shot unless they think Annie Oakley was average.
Click to expand...
Wilson may have been much closer than 35 feet away from Brown when he did the shooting. It was said that Brown laid dead about 35 feet from the cop car, but I don't recall hearing how far Wilson was from Brown.
 
quadraginta said:
If he hit the guy six times out of eight or so (maybe?) while the dude was 35 ft. away and moving then I don't see how anyone can call him a bad shot unless they think Annie Oakley was average.

Real life is a lot different than TV shootouts. From the stats I've seen the average hit rate for cops while engaged with a suspect is about 15%. (And I think that was usually quite a bit closer than 35 ft.)

The arm shots were pretty close to center mass, and if the guy's head was down when he got hit in the head then those shots were (if you'll excuse the expression) dead-on center mass.

If there really was anything to throw his aim off then that just means he was an even better shot.

Wilson may or may not be guilty of some things, but poor marksmanship ain't one of 'em. I sure wouldn't want him shooting at me.
Click to expand...

It's poor shooting if you consider a suspect with a gun. Wilson's first several shots were ineffective and would have allowed return fire. Wilson should have hit center mass with the first shots and stopped the suspect immediately.
 
LTC8K6 said:
It's poor shooting if you consider a suspect with a gun. Wilson's first several shots were ineffective and would have allowed return fire. Wilson should have hit center mass with the first shots and stopped the suspect immediately.
Click to expand...
You are right about going for center mass, but the arm shots may have prevented a right-handed suspect from using a gun with that hand.

Brown's right arm may have become useless after those shots.
 
Kaosium said:
The arms out, like at eye level, amounts to the same thing as a surrender gesture, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

It could.

It could also be a lineman's charge. Both of which observers from different angles might mistake for the other.

If he had his hands in the air, or outforward palms up, or was on his knees, other scene evidence and wound tracks will hopefully show that. Brown was 6'4". Where the rounds went after hitting those spots on his body are going to be massively different for all these positions, especially if the officer is significantly shorter. To me it looks very much as hits from a charge, arms or arm out (but not fully extended) reaching for the target. Six shots all about the same area in rapid succession where Brown feel forward into the path of the last few shots, either from shock of being shot or simply tripping (like on those very, very low shorts). That would be consistent with the final position of the body in the photographs as well, which to me all but disprove the 'hands in the air/on his knees' scenario.

Note how much of that could change with just a little bit more evidence though. If the officer is the same height or taller, then it will be much harder to tell the difference through the wounds. If the body had been moved to search for a weapon, well in that case the body would have not been in the position it was in the photos either, but perhaps staging. If the shots were not in quick order, then it also becomes murky quickly. Six shots was not excessive if only the last one or two ended a charge, but were all unneeded if he was surrendering.

None of that excuses the police forces poor choices in response. And those poor choices don't excuse the rioting, looting, and burning of businesses. Nor would the shooting turning out to be justifiable excuse the obvious distrust and faults of the police in the past.

A pattern of poor policing and disconnect between the force and the community leads to many poor outcomes. The people end up not trusting the police even when the police are in the right. They end up with the 'snitches get stitches' attitude. This attitude is very obviously enforced by some in the community, as shown by the burning of the market with graffti and the fear the liquor store owner had in calling the police. It's an understandable reaction to a feeling of having no agency in the protection of community, a parallel pseudo-structure evolves. Even if that is outright corrupt as well, and it inevitably is (mafia), the people feel at least they have input in it. Obviously to the credit of this community many are not supportive of riots, looting, burning, and attacks. They're not happy with the police, but they don't take that objection into support of lawlessness and violence. This is something I have seen and understand but object to strongly. Many observers have been condoning, excusing, or even cheering the destruction and violence as sticking it to the police. It's not the police's gas station, and even attacks against the police themselves aren't justified. All that does is help the police justify their heavy-handed tactics. Way to prove them right.

It's a mess of interrelated issues, and it's inevitable that people will confuse which causes and affects which and in what ways. The oversimplification of these issues does a disservice to all of them. It's not simply 'police bad/good' or 'community bad/good'. Some of these actions are bad, and some of these individuals have problems, and some of these organizations are maladaptive, but that isn't reason for broad brushes.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom