Israelis in Gaza or Ferguson, MO?

[slaterd]

And there is this report that contradicts the police:

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/mike-brown-autopsy/

"
The bullet that likely ended his life came through the top of his head and exited from his eye, could indicate that he was on his knees with his hands up, facing the officer as he was shot."

How in the hell did the bullet exit his EYE when the bullet entered the top of his head while FACING the cop? What about the entry/exit/re-entry through the eye, jaw, shoulder theory?
Also, give this a read.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/08/19/hands-up-story

Would you agree with me though that if this whole situation went down and a non white cop pulled the trigger, that this would not have happened with riots and getting out of hand?

Exactly.

my argument is solid. the fact that you don't even realize how your racist drivel comes across to people is disturbing

there are no black youth in this country believing that the cops can't shoot them, armed or unarmed.

Whatever man. Take out of the argument what you want to read to try to give ground to your argument. White man disagrees with the view that a black CRIMINAL was shot by a white cop was innocent of everything and was a good little boy , immediately racist. Done arguing with you.

[ParsedOut]

there are no black youth in this country believing that the cops can't shoot them, armed or unarmed.

Ha, now you're omniscient. You continue to elevate yourself in every post, next you'll be requiring us to address you as m'lord.

This goes back to rational thought, if this victim is fired up and ready to fight (which he obviously was) do you really think the reasoning portion of his brain is going to stop him from charging or at minimum making an aggressive gesture or movement towards the officer? You've even said in past threads that you cannot hold people to rational thought at all times.

[smooth]

Would you agree with me though that if this whole situation went down and a non white cop pulled the trigger, that this would not have happened with riots and getting out of hand?

response probably would have been different

you might want to rethink the significance of that, though

White man disagrees with the view that a black CRIMINAL was shot by a white cop

which crimes was he convicted of? I didn't catch that part of the story...

Ha, now you're omniscient. You continue to elevate yourself in every post, next you'll be requiring us to address you as m'lord.

You disagree with my assertion? You either believe that black youth in this country think they can charge a cop pointing a gun at them and not get shot or you don't. Which side of that assertion do you land? I say they don't, you disagree. So you think black youth believe they can charge a cop and won't get shot like slaterd is arguing?

[slaterd]

response probably would have been different

you might want to rethink the significance of that, though


which crimes was he convicted of? I didn't catch that part of the story...

I think you're misunderstanding the difference between CRIMINAL and CONVICT.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/criminal

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/convict

So let me say this again.....HE WAS A CRIMINAL

[QUKBMER]

I think you're misunderstanding the difference between CRIMINAL and CONVICT.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/criminal

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/convict

So let me say this again.....HE WAS A CRIMINAL

Exactly ;)

[smooth]

Exactly ;)

You believe that in the United States you don't have to be charged or convicted in order to be a "criminal?"


We need to do a cross-section of the people making this argument along with the people who argue against government overreach and abuse in Second Amendment threads.

[The Dark Side of Will]

You going to tell me that only the south owned slaves in the day?

Yes. Google "Mason-Dixon Line"

[ParsedOut]

You disagree with my assertion? You either believe that black youth in this country think they can charge a cop pointing a gun at them and not get shot or you don't. Which side of that assertion do you land? I say they don't, you disagree. So you think black youth believe they can charge a cop and won't get shot like slaterd is arguing?

You said "no black youth", maybe we're arguing semantics here again but making a blanket statement like that is asinine, as if you know what's going on in the minds of all black youth. You also fail to address the fact that rational decision making usually goes out the window in a stressful or emotionally charged situation, which this was certainly both.

[slaterd]

You believe that in the United States you don't have to be charged or convicted in order to be a "criminal?"


We need to do a cross-section of the people making this argument along with the people who argue against government overreach and abuse in Second Amendment threads.

Yes that would be called a CONVICT.
Alright bud now you're just reaching out for something. The definition is in plain English, right there in Websters. Would you like for me to give you the number to my lawyer so he can educate you on the definition of criminal???
How about we do a cross section of the person that is blatantly ignoring ALL real evidence that is getting thrown in his face and ALL reasons for this argument in the first place.

[z31maniac]

You believe that in the United States you don't have to be charged or convicted in order to be a "criminal?"

That's basically the exact definition, yes.

So when he literally caused a facial fracture by assaulting the officer, he became a criminal.

If I go downstairs, across the building and I steal food, I'm not a criminal unless I'm charged and convicted? Drug dealers aren't criminals until they are charged and convicted?

Very interesting theorizing you are participating in.

[smooth]

Yes that would be called a CONVICT.
Would you like for me to give you the number to my lawyer so he can educate you on the definition of criminal???

Yes, I'll have a conversation with your attorney. Post his number here or PM it to me.

[smooth]

That's basically the exact definition, yes.

So when he literally caused a facial fracture by assaulting the officer, he became a criminal.

If I go downstairs, across the building and I steal food, I'm not a criminal unless I'm charged and convicted? Drug dealers aren't criminals until they are charged and convicted?

Very interesting theorizing you are participating in.

"One of the most sacred principles in the American criminal justice system, holding that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. In other words, the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, each essential element of the crime charged."

-- http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/presumption_of_innocence

[slaterd]

Yes, I'll have a conversation with your attorney. Post his number here or PM it to me.

Here you go...
(480) 655-0733
Zawtocki Law Offices. He has been my legal advisor and is a licensed lawyer in the state of Arizona.

[smooth]

Here you go...
(480) 655-0733
Zawtocki Law Offices. He has been my legal advisor and is a licensed lawyer in the state of Arizona.

He doesn't practice criminal law, but I'll still talk to him about you. What's your name so he knows what and who we're talking about?

[slaterd]

He doesn't practice criminal law, but I'll still talk to him about you. What's your name so he knows what and who we're talking about?

This is getting childish. A criminal is a person who breaks the law, convicted or not. A convict, is someone that is convicted...see the pattern?