Riots in Missouri - Part 3

As much as I'm against media censorship, sometimes I wish some of these news outlets could be charged with inciting violence.

This is why sometimes the police and the media have a strained relationship (although it also stems from how good your PD's media relation division is and which specific news outlet you're talking about, each news media holds different slants)...

The news will write a headline to garner the most attention. With all the protests against police brutality going on, they will word the headline to sound like it's another case of police aggression...

You won't see this headline:

"Police Officer survives deadly assault from male in St Louis MO area"
 
I'm not sticking up for the kid that pulled the gun but at the same time I'm not fully buying the story. The police down there (or police period) haven't always been proven to be the most honest in these situations as of late. I just find it odd how the cop didn't have his body cam on, I just read, or his dash cam wasn't on either. Given recent events you'd think they'd be more careful with this, right?
 
I think that everyone is missing the fact that the guy did not die right away. The police did not let him receive any medical attention and just left him on the ground for an hour to bleed out.
 
I think that everyone is missing the fact that the guy did not die right away. The police did not let him receive any medical attention and just left him on the ground for an hour to bleed out.

Then they loaded his body in a minivan. Apparently MO lacks ambulances down there.

This is why the protesters are upset. Its not just "oh they're killing us" as everyone wants to make it out to be. Its the lack of respect for black lives. Same with Tamir Rice. The police didn't give that little boy medical attention right away.
 
Not surprising at all.

I'm glad that this article had quotes from the mother and then ended with the facts about his criminal record. I wish all news reports did that. Honestly, I'm tired of the news interviewing the thug's mother. It's so predictable and the news only does it to increase the emotional response the news story will receive. The mother always states her son is the greatest thing since slice bread... at least this article does the right thing and totally contradicts her by showing his record displays him as a violent person.... 3 assaults, armed robbery, multiple weapon offenses. I'm tired of hearing from the mom in these types of stories. Where is the story where the criminal's mom or dad is interviewed and they state "yes, our son is a criminal with violent tendencies, we've tried helping him, but he never accepted our help." ????

Agreed!

I mean, that quote from Orlando Brown says it all. He admits he doesn't have the details, but he goes on this speech against "police aggression".

We're not dealing with the best and brightest here.

Agreed!

The level of ignorance among these protestors is astounding. We're never going to get anywhere. People need to stop playing into the media's desire to create a race war. I read the big bold headline on yahoo this morning. They are hoping people don't read the article and jump to conclusions. Good for them. More will die.


Agreed!

As much as I'm against media censorship, sometimes I wish some of these news outlets could be charged with inciting violence.

Agreed!
 
I'm not sticking up for the kid that pulled the gun but at the same time I'm not fully buying the story. The police down there (or police period) haven't always been proven to be the most honest in these situations as of late. I just find it odd how the cop didn't have his body cam on, I just read, or his dash cam wasn't on either. Given recent events you'd think they'd be more careful with this, right?

Here is a cut and paste from one of the articles:
According to a statement from St. Louis County police spokesman Sgt. Brian Schellman, a Berkeley police officer was conducting a routine business check at a gas station around 11:15 p.m. Tuesday when he approached two men.

One of the men pulled a handgun and pointed it at the officer, Schellman said. The officer fired several shots, fatally wounding the man. The second man fled, and the dead man's handgun has been recovered, according to Schellman.


If that is correct, then it thoroughly explains why body cam and dash cam were not on/used.
 
Here is a cut and paste from one of the articles:
According to a statement from St. Louis County police spokesman Sgt. Brian Schellman, a Berkeley police officer was conducting a routine business check at a gas station around 11:15 p.m. Tuesday when he approached two men.

One of the men pulled a handgun and pointed it at the officer, Schellman said. The officer fired several shots, fatally wounding the man. The second man fled, and the dead man's handgun has been recovered, according to Schellman.


If that is correct, then it thoroughly explains why body cam and dash cam were not on/used.

1: They should always be on.

2: It doesn't explain why they left him on the ground to die for an hour and didn't allow him to receive medical attention for his wounds.
 
1: They should always be on.

2: It doesn't explain why they left him on the ground to die for an hour and didn't allow him to receive medical attention for his wounds.

A dash cam typically is only activated when the officer's patrol car lights and/or siren are activated. A routine business check would not require the lights and siren to be on.

A body cam would not always be on, it would most likely be activated by the officer when he is responding to a call or has some reason to believe that something was about to happen. Once again, the first issue here is not in play. We do not know right now why he approached these 2 men, they might not have appeared suspicious, maybe just loitering and he may have been asking them to leave the area (I do not think that would require the body cam to be turned on, unless there was some greater issue). Now, if he saw them smoking weed, brandishing a gun, if they appeared to be someone that he knew had an active warrant, or so on, then I would think he would have activated the body cam (assuming that he did in fact have one).

I am not commenting on them not allowing him to get medical attention, because that has nothing to do with the things I commented on.

There is a video here that shows a distant view of the incident, but does appear to show the suspect raise a gun at the officer
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/24/man-shot-killed-berkeley/20849045/

Also, to your 2nd point, from that same article:
The body of the young man remained on the scene for about two hours, Belmar said. After Brown died in August, his body remained on the street for more than four hours, an action that drew widespread criticism.

Belmar said two hours is fairly typical as police gather evidence, and interference from protesters may have prolonged the situation in Berkeley.
 
A dash cam typically is only activated when the officer's patrol car lights and/or siren are activated. A routine business check would not require the lights and siren to be on.

A body cam would not always be on, it would most likely be activated by the officer when he is responding to a call or has some reason to believe that something was about to happen. Once again, the first issue here is not in play. We do not know right now why he approached these 2 men, they might not have appeared suspicious, maybe just loitering and he may have been asking them to leave the area (I do not think that would require the body cam to be turned on, unless there was some greater issue). Now, if he saw them smoking weed, brandishing a gun, if they appeared to be someone that he knew had an active warrant, or so on, then I would think he would have activated the body cam (assuming that he did in fact have one).

I am not commenting on them not allowing him to get medical attention, because that has nothing to do with the things I commented on.

There is a video here that shows a distant view of the incident, but does appear to show the suspect raise a gun at the officer
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/24/man-shot-killed-berkeley/20849045/

Also, to your 2nd point, from that same article:
The body of the young man remained on the scene for about two hours, Belmar said. After Brown died in August, his body remained on the street for more than four hours, an action that drew widespread criticism.

Belmar said two hours is fairly typical as police gather evidence, and interference from protesters may have prolonged the situation in Berkeley.

1: It doesn't matter what the current protocol is. The cameras should be on all the time. What reason is there to not have them on all the time?

2: He was alive for the fist half hour. They could have gotten him medical care and they did not.
 
What's a routine business check? The conference MO police just had stated that they were responding to a robbery/stealing.
 
The level of ignorance among these protestors is astounding. We're never going to get anywhere. People need to stop playing into the media's desire to create a race war. I read the big bold headline on yahoo this morning. They are hoping people don't read the article and jump to conclusions. Good for them. More will die.

It's truly disgusting how the media is handling this stuff. I have yet to see an article about the killing of the two cops in New York with the headline saying a black man killed two cops in fact it seemed most articles didn't mention his race at all much like the first article about a group of black guy's killing a male Bosnian American with a hammer, race was only brought in with the second article when a group of black guys pulled a female Bosnian American from her car and beat her unconscious. All I can say is what a bunch of hypocrites.
 
1: It doesn't matter what the current protocol is. The cameras should be on all the time. What reason is there to not have them on all the time?

2: He was alive for the fist half hour. They could have gotten him medical care and they did not.

1.
What do you mean it doesn't matter what the current protocol is? If the police department tells the officer 1) turn it on when you respond to a call or 2) use your own discretion....then that is what the officer should and probably will follow.
I really don't see why they should be on all the time and I don't know if the batteries can last being on for a typical 12 hour shift.

2.
I have not read that yet. Even if that is true, I SERIOUSLY doubt that the officer prevented EMTs from assisting a live, injured suspect.

What's a routine business check? The conference MO police just had stated that they were responding to a robbery/stealing.

Some businesses ask police to randomly come by their business (same reason they often offer police free coffee), because they would prefer to have that police presence randomly in the hopes of keeping away potential criminals. Sometimes this request is made after recent issues, such as shoplifting, loitering, drug sales on property, etc.
I have not read anything yet about police responding to a robbery/stealing**Edit: just read article on abcnews.com that said police responded to a "larceny."
 
I have not read anything yet about police responding to a robbery/stealing.

Unless I'm hearing/understanding wrong, in the press conference video Officer Belmar said the cop was responding to a call about stealing. It wasn't routine like you're saying you read.

This is why I say it's hard to trust police word. One minute its this then the next its that.
 
1.
What do you mean it doesn't matter what the current protocol is? If the police department tells the officer 1) turn it on when you respond to a call or 2) use your own discretion....then that is what the officer should and probably will follow.
I really don't see why they should be on all the time and I don't know if the batteries can last being on for a typical 12 hour shift.

I'm speaking to the larger issue that the cams should be on all the time to minimize police misconduct as much as possible.

2.
I have not read that yet. Even if that is true, I SERIOUSLY doubt that the officer prevented EMTs from assisting a live, injured suspect.

They also didn't call for EMT assistance when they could have. That's still allowing the man to die.
 
Good, one less thug out on the streets terrorizing people.

Newsflash, if you pull a gun on a cop, consider your life void. If you want to live, don't pull a gun on a cop. Look at that rap sheet. This guy was a thug pure and simple and got what he deserved.

Cue Sharpton and his racist posse in 3....2....1....
 
Good, one less thug out on the streets terrorizing people.

Newsflash, if you pull a gun on a cop, consider your life void. If you want to live, don't pull a gun on a cop. Look at that rap sheet. This guy was a thug pure and simple and got what he deserved.

Cue Sharpton and his racist posse in 3....2....1....

Your world view is horrible. We're not supposed to live in that kind of society.
 
Good, one less thug out on the streets terrorizing people.

Newsflash, if you pull a gun on a cop, consider your life void. If you want to live, don't pull a gun on a cop. Look at that rap sheet. This guy was a thug pure and simple and got what he deserved.

Cue Sharpton and his racist posse in 3....2....1....

:whatever:

You guys on here sure do love the word "thug".

"If you want to live, don't pull a gun on a cop." Well what about the other incidents brought up on here? Every single time a black person loses their life at the hands of a cop you all bring up his criminal past as if its justification for their deaths. "Look at that rap sheet"? So the **** what. "Thug pure and simple" as if he didn't have a family.

But let me shut up before someone says something like "The Boston Bomber had a family too. Guess we should feel sorry for them as well."

You're all entitled to your opinions even if they are trash.
 
Your world view is horrible. We're not supposed to live in that kind of society.
I absolutely don't agree with what he said or how he said it, but what kind of society is it that you're talking about?

Trying to defend a guy who has been convicted of multiple violent crimes, who pointed a gun at a police officer, and somehow this is the police officer's fault?

We're not supposed to live in that kind of society.
 
I absolutely don't agree with what he said or how he said it, but what kind of society is it that you're talking about?

One where agents of the state leave anyone to die when it is within their power to help.

Trying to defend a guy who has been convicted of multiple violent crimes, who pointed a gun at a police officer, and somehow this is the police officer's fault?

We're not supposed to live in that kind of society.

I'm not sure what you're saying here or how it is relevant.
 
:whatever:

You guys on here sure do love the word "thug".

"If you want to live, don't pull a gun on a cop." Well what about the other incidents brought up on here? Every single time a black person loses their life at the hands of a cop you all bring up his criminal past as if its justification for their deaths. "Look at that rap sheet"? So the **** what. "Thug pure and simple" as if he didn't have a family.

But let me shut up before someone says something like "The Boston Bomber had a family too. Guess we should feel sorry for them as well."

You're all entitled to your opinions even if they are trash.

Thug is the new N word. Dude doesn't have the balls to say the N word to a black person so Thug is he way of feeling vindicated.
Anyway, All this talk about black people pulling out guns on police deserve to get shot, blah, blah, blah...............this video shows a guy with a gun, disobeying police officers but yet lived to tell about it. It's easy to play what if but come on. If dude was black or Latino, it would have ended very differently.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9REsxeMnuIM

Another one where dude did nothing wrong but gets the third degree but yet racism doesn't exist. :whatever:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsX9aFlFNug
 
I'm not sticking up for the kid that pulled the gun but at the same time I'm not fully buying the story. The police down there (or police period) haven't always been proven to be the most honest in these situations as of late. I just find it odd how the cop didn't have his body cam on, I just read, or his dash cam wasn't on either. Given recent events you'd think they'd be more careful with this, right?

"As of late?" Seriously? This has ALWAYS gone on. Crooked/abusive cops are not a new phenomenon.
 
You're definitely right RockSP, I'm hip. I guess what I meant was St. Police specifically in recent events.
 
"As of late?" Seriously? This has ALWAYS gone on. Crooked/abusive cops are not a new phenomenon.
And there have always been crime and criminals. It will ALWAYS continue to go on because we're talking about large groups of people. There are some bad people in all walks of life.

Thank+you+kevin+hart_66c69e_5367729.jpg
 
One where agents of the state leave anyone to die when it is within their power to help.



I'm not sure what you're saying here or how it is relevant.
I'm saying we're not supposed to live in a society where people commit acts of violence, or steal from each other, yet here we are. We have a system to deal with such problems, but when the police do their job they are almost automatically chastised and accused of being racist murderers regardless of the details and circumstances.

It's relevant for several reasons, but mostly because you're saying we shouldn't live in a society where a cop shoots a violent criminal for pointing a gun at them.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,265
Messages
22,075,716
Members
45,875
Latest member
shanandrews
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"