Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeke
Which is why, in instances such as these, I try to deal in data. Unless you believe the data is wrong or has been tampered with, we know that the entire altercation occurred within a thirty-five foot (~2 car lengths of a 2013 Ford Taurus) linear progression with at least one shot being fired (hitting the kid) while he was in the car. Some folks say the kid was pulled in. Others say he assaulted the officer to get there. It really doesn't matter as the prior is being lawfully detained and the other is an unlawful assault. The bottom line is the kid was at one point in the car which traveled a whole two car lengths throughout the incident.
|
Let's just focus on this. Let's say that a LEO grabs some part of my anatomy, pulls hard, and brings me in painful contact with some part of a police cruiser. I naturally try to break his grip and avoid further painful trauma. According to you, he now has the right to kill me?
If so, bad has become normal and lawful, and I want it changed. The idea of taking away the guns from police comes to mind.
If not, then facts that will probably have to be weighed by a jury come into play. Basically, did Mike Brown assault the officer, or did the officer grab Mike Brown through the car window, in a way the Brown could reasonably interpret not as an arrest for jaywalking, but as an attempt to harm him?
I don't think the officer departed the station that morning with the intent of killing some citizen. But I think that, like you, he has a very critical story in his head about the kids that were jaywalking. Something about 'generational rage, and entitlement,' in your case, as I recall. He may have gotten mad when he saw the kids in the street. He may have told them to 'get the fuck on the sidewalk,' or something like that.
This command, for some reason, may have produced a reaction he didn't like. He may have made a move with the police cruiser that put him in close proximity with Michael Brown. He then may have attempted to quickly exit the cruiser, but the door hit Brown, then came back and hit the officer. He may, rightly or wrongly, have interpreted this as an assault by Brown. This may have caused him to become enraged, and respond by grabbing Brown through the car window, and shooting him.
Is there any part of this possible scenario that does not fit the agreed-on facts that we have? Is it in some way outlandish, so that even though possible, is it absurdly unlikely?
I think this story, consistent with witness reports in the media, is possible. I think the police should acknowledge this possibility to the community. They should release the officers name, as an assurance that he is being investigated and will be held responsible if evidence of wrongdoing is found. I think they should acknowledge that the shooting of the young man was a tragedy, even if it turns out to be 'justified.' I think they should pledge at this point to try harder to avoid such tragedies in the future. I think there should be respectful, open dialog with an understandably-upset community.
I think the fact that this has NOT been the police response, so far, is contributing to the continued unrest. So far all people have heard is stuff like what you've said. And what you keep saying is that 'killing Michael Brown was his job.' And fuck you.
I know, neither the police or you have added the 'fuck you.' But I assure you the aggrieved citizens of Ferguson think they hear it, right at the end of the cold, clipped, defensive stone-wall prose. Loud and clear.