At least St Louis isn't in Ohio

• Midstate01

  

  Lol this attorney for the family hires a professional to do an autopsy. The autopsy shows no shots were fired from behind. The family then has a presser and completely changes what the man who did the autopsy says...
  
  Bet the media will run with this too...
• vdubb96

  

  TedSheckler;1645169 wrote:
  
  "This creepy-ass cracker cop was following Michael Brown. I told him the cop might be a rapist."

  Her neck is huge!!!!!!
• vball10set

  vdubb96;1645191 wrote:Her neck is huge!!!!!!

  
• gut

  Midstate01;1645188 wrote:Lol this attorney for the family hires a professional to do an autopsy...

  Attorney has to be pissed he'll probaby never recoup what he paid for that autopsy. The past few days have seen a wrongful death suit go from millions to jack fucking squat.
• gut

  vdubb96;1645191 wrote:Her neck is huge!!!!!!

  Eventually the fat runs out of other places to go.
• WebFire

  vdubb96;1645191 wrote:Her is huge!!!!!!

  FIFY
• bases_loaded

  

  So he exits the police car then chargers officer that has his gun drawn. Officer fires, still charging, fires, still charging, fires until he drops.
  
  Black people riot and destroy other peoples property.
  
  Media goes nuts.
  
  President dances to jazz.
• WebFire

  bases_loaded;1645203 wrote:So he exits the police car then chargers officer that has his gun drawn. Officer fires, still charging, fires, still charging, fires until he drops.
  
  Black people riot and destroy other peoples property.
  
  Media goes nuts.
  
  President dances to jazz.

  Sounds accurate.
• KB0938

  Midstate01;1645121 wrote:I also am laughing at these reporters saying it's like a war zone. 1) how would they know. 2) I think you should be really careful with how you say that.
  
  This whole thing is completely fucked up.
  
  Also, and yea I know CNN blows, but tonight everyone they interview is black. Everyone doing the interviewing is black. There is one white woman. The rest of these people are black. They never ever ever ask questions about how this situation could have been brought on by this kid. Not once. Every single interview is talking about war zone, cops going too far, innocent black kids.

  Tends to happen when the area is majority black...
• robj55

  

  This race shit is annoying.
• vball10set

  bases_loaded;1645203 wrote:So he exits the police car then chargers officer that has his gun drawn. Officer fires, still charging, fires, still charging, fires until he drops.
  
  Black people riot and destroy other peoples property.
  
  Media goes nuts.
  
  President golfs.

  fify
  
  
• bases_loaded

  

  cavity backed nikes...could've guessed
• Midstate01

  

  KB0938;1645279 wrote:Tends to happen when the area is majority black...

  I meant "experts" not on the street. Should have clarified.
• derek bomar

  

  so... he was shot at distance charging? the whole thing seems off. I'm glad he wasn't shot in the back, but why the hell was he shot at all is what I want to know? You only using deadly force if your life is in danger, and I'm pretty sure that from a distance someone who is unarmed is incapable of mortally wounding you. So I'm not sure why he was shot.
  
  Bring on the hate now...
• QuakerOats

  rmolin73;1644568 wrote:You must be ccrunners dumb ass uncle. Lol carry on.

  
  I merely asked a question in search of information; sorry you did not have any appropriate answers.
• WebFire

  derek bomar;1645298 wrote:so... he was shot at distance charging? the whole thing seems off. I'm glad he wasn't shot in the back, but why the hell was he shot at all is what I want to know? You only using deadly force if your life is in danger, and I'm pretty sure that from a distance someone who is unarmed is incapable of mortally wounding you. So I'm not sure why he was shot.
  
  Bring on the hate now...

  I actually wonder the same. What made the officer(s) draw weapon to begin with if he was only running off? And why did they not just try to take him down if he was unarmed? Did they think he was armed?
• rmolin73

  

  QuakerOats;1645299 wrote:I merely asked a question in search of information; sorry you did not have any appropriate answers.

  My mistake in thinking that someone that uses the search function as adamantly as you would use it to find the information.
• Glory Days

  

  derek bomar;1645298 wrote:so... he was shot at distance charging? the whole thing seems off. I'm glad he wasn't shot in the back, but why the hell was he shot at all is what I want to know? You only using deadly force if your life is in danger, and I'm pretty sure that from a distance someone who is unarmed is incapable of mortally wounding you. So I'm not sure why he was shot.
  
  Bring on the hate now...

  because the guy already attempted to grab the gun from the officer one time, should the cop let him get close enough to grab it again and then shoot.....oh wait, that makes sense. going for an officer's gun justifies deadly force. always has.
  

  WebFire;1645306 wrote:I actually wonder the same. What made the officer(s) draw weapon to begin with if he was only running off? And why did they not just try to take him down if he was unarmed? Did they think he was armed?

  because the cop already has his gun drawn after firing a shot inside the car. no cop is trained to fire, reholster, fire, reholster, fire etc etc. you shoot, stop the threat, scan the area for more threats, then when you deem it safe, you reholster. and like I typed above, the guy already tried to take the gun from the cop, there is no way in hell that cop is going to let him get close enough to try and take the gun again.
• SportsAndLady

  

  derek bomar;1645298 wrote:so... he was shot at distance charging? the whole thing seems off. I'm glad he wasn't shot in the back, but why the hell was he shot at all is what I want to know? You only using deadly force if your life is in danger, and I'm pretty sure that from a distance someone who is unarmed is incapable of mortally wounding you. So I'm not sure why he was shot.
  
  Bring on the hate now...

  No one is going to hate on you for wondering that. I think everyone wonders that. Look, no one wants people shot in this country. You can be both in the police officers favor AND be upset an 18 year old was shot and killed.
• Raw Dawgin' it

  

  WebFire;1645306 wrote:I actually wonder the same. What made the officer(s) draw weapon to begin with if he was only running off? And why did they not just try to take him down if he was unarmed? Did they think he was armed?

  I heard they got into a confrontation at the officers cruisers, MB ran off, and according to the video, started charging back. If he was attached while in the car that's why he'd have his gun drawn, and if he was charging he may have been justified in shooting to protect himself, since MB is the size of a lineman, or he panicked. Either way it's impossible to tell if MB had anything concealed until after.
• Raw Dawgin' it

  

  Glory Days;1645318 wrote:because the guy already attempted to grab the gun from the officer one time, should the cop let him get close enough to grab it again and then shoot.....oh wait, that makes sense. going for an officer's gun justifies deadly force. always has.
  
  
  
  because the cop already has his gun drawn after firing a shot inside the car. no cop is trained to fire, reholster, fire, reholster, fire etc etc. you shoot, stop the threat, scan the area for more threats, then when you deem it safe, you reholster. and like I typed above, the guy already tried to take the gun from the cop, there is no way in hell that cop is going to let him get close enough to try and take the gun again.

  
  this
• QuakerOats

  rmolin73;1645312 wrote:My mistake in thinking that someone that uses the search function as adamantly as you would use it to find the information.

  
  
  My bad; I thought a few countries would immediately come to mind and be offered up by the superior intellects on board here.
• derek bomar

  

  Glory Days;1645318 wrote:because the guy already attempted to grab the gun from the officer one time, should the cop let him get close enough to grab it again and then shoot.....oh wait, that makes sense. going for an officer's gun justifies deadly force. always has.

  Yea actually since he wasn't a) close enough yet to grab it again and b) unarmed... he had no right to shoot him. And I'd like to see the evidence of him trying to grab the gun. Every eye witness account (for what that's worth...) I've seen had the cop trying to grab MB into the cruiser and then MB running. Then MB turns around after being shot at, then gets lit up while saying don't shoot.
  
  I am all for police safety and their right to defend themselves if they feel in any way threatened. And MB should have been arrested. That said, you can't just shoot people because they're running from you and you're pissed. Which is what I suspect happened.
• Pick6

  

  If that big mother fucker Mike Brown was charging me I would feel like my life was in danger as well, especially considering the prior altercation. Back on the cops side and more than likely staying there.
• HelloAgain

  gut;1645125 wrote:then what you're left with is involuntary manslaughter, at best.

  Take his badge, but not his life.

  So the penalty for involuntary manslaughter(if that's what it ends up being) is losing your job?