Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

GodofTV

Rank #15389 on Comments
GodofTV Avatar Level 244 Comments: Doinitrite
Offline
Send mail to GodofTV Block GodofTV Invite GodofTV to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Date Signed Up:3/11/2010
Last Login:12/22/2014
Location:Everywere
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#15389
Highest Comment Rank:#959
Comment Thumbs: 4536 total,  6434 ,  1898
Content Level Progress: 6.77% (4/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 67% (67/100)
Level 244 Comments: Doinitrite → Level 245 Comments: Doinitrite
Subscribers:1
Total Comments Made:1292
FJ Points:4583

latest user's comments

#75 - "He wasn't on trial for murder. It was an indictment, whi… 12/19/2014 on Hands up! 0
#72 - "I feel this-" "I think this-" "This … 12/16/2014 on Hands up! 0
#71 - "That isn't how claims work, you have to provide evidence…  [+] (3 new replies) 12/16/2014 on Hands up! 0
User avatar #73 - noblexfenrir (12/17/2014) [-]
"If someone is on trial for murder..."
He wasn't on trial for murder. It was an indictment, which is by definition a situation where the burden of proof is on those claiming the crime was committed and must then convince a grand jury of this same conclusion. Clearly they agreed with Wilson's account of events.

"not have been necessary to shoot him in the head. "
The bullets were fired quickly after one another, it makes it difficult to stop shooting to make sure how each bullet affected the man when he's charging you. It also is difficult to tell the difference immediately between someone staggering/falling forward with constant forward momentum, and continuing their charge.

"The point is this cannot be proven"
Then we deal with the evidence that we have. Conspiracies are nice for mulling over, but they require evidence like everything else.

"this unarmed, untrained teenager would still have managed to beat the large officer?"
The teenager who previously went for the officers gun and still was charging him after taking a few shots? Yes.

"If that's the case then Wilson isn't fit to protect anyone."
I say different.

" No where does it dictate that an officer has 5 seconds..."
An officer has to diffuse a situation in the safest and fastest way possible. Someone who is a danger to either another individual or the officer himself is putting the officer in a situation where they have to determine whether or not the threat is credible enough to use deadly force. I and the grand jury agree that this situation dictated this level of force.

"a teenager walked up to a cop car unprovoked and started attacking an officer"
Did you even read the testimony of events? It was said that Wilson approached them after noticing the cigars in Browns hands, he pulled his car out in front of them and when he went to exit Brown slammed the door shut. He wasn't unprovoked considering he just committed a crime and an officer was now approaching him-
User avatar #75 - GodofTV (12/19/2014) [-]
"He wasn't on trial for murder. It was an indictment, which is by definition a situation where the burden of proof is on those claiming the crime was committed."
In that you are correct, and I would counter with a well known prosecutor's saying "You can indict a ham sandwich", the meaning of this is that if there is even the slightest inkling that a crime was committed then there should be an indictment.

The reason I returned to this discussion isn't to challenge your points, its clear that you have no issue with unarmed teenagers getting shot (or maybe your fine just because he was black?), what I wanted to bring to your attention the curious case of witness #40.
www.nydailynews.com/news/national/witness-40-ferguson-grand-jury-racist-liar-report-article-1.2047404
The testimonial of this woman (inexplicable presented by the prosecutor) coincided so perfectly with every claim by Wilson that it had a major impact on the case. She did interviews with Fox News, who praised her bravery and candor. The only problem is that she was nowhere near the scene. And she's mentally unstable (bipolar disorder) and refuses to take her medication. And her reason for being on the scene changed (from 'visiting a friend' to 'I like to go to black neighborhoods in order to study them so I won't call n*ggers). The woman, Sandra McElroy, had lied during the trials of two other high profile police cases in the St. Louise area. In fact, the police know she is a well known fraud and still allowed her testimony.
www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDEQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slate.com%2Fblogs%2Fthe_slatest%2F2014%2F12%2F16%2Fwitness_40_michael_brown_football_player_witness_unreliability_history_of.html&ei=t6uTVMbpMomZNs-tgegO&usg=AFQjCNG4iue7l0T3x0eIfQNOoOwTD892nA&bvm=bv.82001339,d.eXY

www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/unmasking-Ferguson-witness-40-496236

This was the only witness that perfectly corroborated Wilson's story.
User avatar #74 - noblexfenrir (12/17/2014) [-]
-not even taking into consideration his impaired judgement, yes I do believe attacking an officer is well within his means. Sorry if you just don't think people make stupid decisions, but it happens.

"This isn't an opinion, it's a moral imperative "
Stop saying unarmed like it means anything. This was an individual who was attacking a police officer who had also previously gone for that officers gun. An officer who is already injured from the individual and is being charged at, has to make a split second decision and he did not feel he would be able to safely detain this man if he got to him. Thus fearing for his own safety. Do you get angry with home owners who shoot home invaders?

"I'm the only one using facts"
Hardly. Your points can basically be summarized as you thinking Brown couldn't have done any damage to Wilson and Wilson is just a constant lier.

"ruining this nation wide discussion"
Lol what discussion? We should discuss how this one black teen fucked up and made stupid decisions and attacked an officer? There are ridiculous amounts of police brutality and abuse of power out there and yet people keep focusing on the one where the officer was actually in the right.

"cold blood, not those trying to voice their concerns."
Prove it was in cold blood. I want proof that against the officers testimony, the autopsy evidence, and Wilsons medical exam, that Wilson was in no real danger and just wanted to kill the man for the sake of killing him. I don't want what you believe, I want evidence. Chances are you have none.

#68 - "Evidence outside of purely witness testimony has shown t…  [+] (7 new replies) 12/15/2014 on Hands up! 0
User avatar #69 - noblexfenrir (12/16/2014) [-]
"There is no way to prove he didn't have his hands up."
That isn't how claims work, you have to provide evidence he did have his hands up. Even outside of witness testimony the autopsy report shows the wounds inflicted specifically to his arms would be impossible with them over his head since they align directly with other wounds in his torso.

"One of the bullets entered his clavicle"
*Re-entered into his clavicle after already striking the most forward facing section of the forehead. Both bullets that struck Browns head coincide with the officers recollection of events if he was in a leaning charging motion and was staggered by previous shots.

"giving him ample time to fabricate that pussy little bruise on his cheek. "
Either give evidence of this being a constant in Wilsons past or evidence which leads you to believe this happened. "But cops do it all the time!" isn't an answer, I'm asking for evidence specific to this case.

"NO ONE WITHOUT A WEAPON..."
www.nj.com/bergen/index.ssf/2014/07/mahwah_man_crashes_car_threatens_to_kill_officers_with_pretend_gun_cops_say.html

www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/10/cleveland_man_scares_off_butch.html

and as I said, I see this shit every day. Stupid people will be stupid, Micheal Brown was not only stupid, but also supposedly under the influence which can alter his decision making.

"at ONE individual. Even if Michael was a fucking professional linebacker as opposed to a teenager that is overkill. "
Clearly not since it took all of those to take him down. Again, you don't shoot a specific amount and hope it works, you shoot until the desired effect occurs, either the attacker is deterred or dead. He was clearly not deterred, so Wilson had to shoot until he was dead.

"Tasers are a piece of the standard police officer uniform, holstered on the right hip"
Wilson specifically stated he was not wearing his at the time. The precinct has a limited amount and many officers elect not-
User avatar #70 - noblexfenrir (12/16/2014) [-]
-to wear them because they are extremely uncomfortable and take up alot of room. Regardless, he could not use the taser if it was not immediately available.

" If our officers don't know how to fight and are in fact only good for pulling a fucking trigger"
They are trained to diffuse a situation in the most immediate way possible. You said "Fighting him like a man" which is generally the worst choice to diffuse a situation. If someone is hell bent on putting the officer or another person in danger (Which evidence corroborates was Brown's intent) then yes, you pull the fucking trigger. Just like I would expect one to do if you were being attacked by an assailant. But you'd never need protection, you can fight them off like a "real man". Hue.

"They're nothing more than killers. "
Yes, killing someone who reached for your gun and assaulted you in your vehicle, who was also now charging full force at you, makes you a cold-blooded murderer. Wait no, it makes you a rational thinking fucking human being. Too bad he didn't have your amazing hand-to-hand combat skills or he could have simply knocked him out with a two-finger punch between the eyes, but not everyone is as efficient as you.

"Pretty sure you're retarded.Oh well"
Aw, except my answers rely on evidence, yours rely on your feelings and preconceived notions regarding law enforcement and physical combat. I have yet to see an answer from you that isn't some variation of "I feel this-" "I think this-" "This in my opinion-" I don't give two shits about your opinion on the subject, the only important people in this case gave their opinion/judgment. Give facts, or just fuck off.

graphics8.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2014/11/24/ferguson-evidence/assets/reports/michael-brown-private-autopsy-report.pdf

localtvktvi.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/darren-wilson-medical-records.pdf
User avatar #72 - GodofTV (12/16/2014) [-]
"I feel this-" "I think this-" "This in my opinion-"
I haven't used any of these phrases, I'm not using conjecture or opinion. If you're a principled human being then you should see the value in maintaining a society wherein individuals are forbidden from shooting unarmed adolescents 6-7 times. This isn't an opinion, it's a moral imperative
"Give facts, or just fuck off."
Seems to me that I'm the only one using facts, you're spouting the same Fox News bullshit that's ruining this nation wide discussion. I will say this again, the burden of proof should fall on the shoulders of the man who shot an unarmed teenager to death in cold blood, not those trying to voice their concerns.
User avatar #71 - GodofTV (12/16/2014) [-]
"That isn't how claims work, you have to provide evidence he did have his hands up."
If someone is on trial for murder, as Wilson should have been, then the burden falls on him to prove it was in fact self defense.
"... leaning charging motion and was staggered by previous shot."
Assuming for a moment that this telling of events is true, if a boy is staggering from having being shot then it should not have been necessary to shoot him in the head.
"Either give evidence of this being a constant in Wilsons past or evidence which leads you to believe this happened."
The point is this cannot be proven, his wounds should have been noted on the scene but, mysteriously, no one took pictures of them. Despite what protocol dictates. Funny, isn't it?
"NO ONE WITHOUT A WEAPON (who wasn't attempting suicide by police)"
Apparently you weren't able to completely read my sentence (perhaps it was too long or challenging for you?) because I'm sure that if you had you wouldn't have removed the qualifier I added in order to further you're point.
"He was clearly not deterred, so Wilson had to shoot until he was dead."
So you're claim is that if Wilson had merely shot Michael Brown twice, this unarmed, untrained teenager would still have managed to beat the large officer? If that's the case then Wilson isn't fit to protect anyone.
"They are trained to diffuse a situation in the most immediate way possible."
In that you are simply incorrect, they are trained to diffuse the situation NO MATTER how long it takes. No where does it dictate that an officer has 5 seconds to calm someone before blowing their brains out of their skull.
"If someone is hell bent on putting the officer or another person in danger"
If you believe for one second that a teenager walked up to a cop car unprovoked and started attacking an officer then this debate it pointless because you are clearly too far removed from reality to harken to reason.
User avatar #73 - noblexfenrir (12/17/2014) [-]
"If someone is on trial for murder..."
He wasn't on trial for murder. It was an indictment, which is by definition a situation where the burden of proof is on those claiming the crime was committed and must then convince a grand jury of this same conclusion. Clearly they agreed with Wilson's account of events.

"not have been necessary to shoot him in the head. "
The bullets were fired quickly after one another, it makes it difficult to stop shooting to make sure how each bullet affected the man when he's charging you. It also is difficult to tell the difference immediately between someone staggering/falling forward with constant forward momentum, and continuing their charge.

"The point is this cannot be proven"
Then we deal with the evidence that we have. Conspiracies are nice for mulling over, but they require evidence like everything else.

"this unarmed, untrained teenager would still have managed to beat the large officer?"
The teenager who previously went for the officers gun and still was charging him after taking a few shots? Yes.

"If that's the case then Wilson isn't fit to protect anyone."
I say different.

" No where does it dictate that an officer has 5 seconds..."
An officer has to diffuse a situation in the safest and fastest way possible. Someone who is a danger to either another individual or the officer himself is putting the officer in a situation where they have to determine whether or not the threat is credible enough to use deadly force. I and the grand jury agree that this situation dictated this level of force.

"a teenager walked up to a cop car unprovoked and started attacking an officer"
Did you even read the testimony of events? It was said that Wilson approached them after noticing the cigars in Browns hands, he pulled his car out in front of them and when he went to exit Brown slammed the door shut. He wasn't unprovoked considering he just committed a crime and an officer was now approaching him-
User avatar #75 - GodofTV (12/19/2014) [-]
"He wasn't on trial for murder. It was an indictment, which is by definition a situation where the burden of proof is on those claiming the crime was committed."
In that you are correct, and I would counter with a well known prosecutor's saying "You can indict a ham sandwich", the meaning of this is that if there is even the slightest inkling that a crime was committed then there should be an indictment.

The reason I returned to this discussion isn't to challenge your points, its clear that you have no issue with unarmed teenagers getting shot (or maybe your fine just because he was black?), what I wanted to bring to your attention the curious case of witness #40.
www.nydailynews.com/news/national/witness-40-ferguson-grand-jury-racist-liar-report-article-1.2047404
The testimonial of this woman (inexplicable presented by the prosecutor) coincided so perfectly with every claim by Wilson that it had a major impact on the case. She did interviews with Fox News, who praised her bravery and candor. The only problem is that she was nowhere near the scene. And she's mentally unstable (bipolar disorder) and refuses to take her medication. And her reason for being on the scene changed (from 'visiting a friend' to 'I like to go to black neighborhoods in order to study them so I won't call n*ggers). The woman, Sandra McElroy, had lied during the trials of two other high profile police cases in the St. Louise area. In fact, the police know she is a well known fraud and still allowed her testimony.
www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDEQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slate.com%2Fblogs%2Fthe_slatest%2F2014%2F12%2F16%2Fwitness_40_michael_brown_football_player_witness_unreliability_history_of.html&ei=t6uTVMbpMomZNs-tgegO&usg=AFQjCNG4iue7l0T3x0eIfQNOoOwTD892nA&bvm=bv.82001339,d.eXY

www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/unmasking-Ferguson-witness-40-496236

This was the only witness that perfectly corroborated Wilson's story.
User avatar #74 - noblexfenrir (12/17/2014) [-]
-not even taking into consideration his impaired judgement, yes I do believe attacking an officer is well within his means. Sorry if you just don't think people make stupid decisions, but it happens.

"This isn't an opinion, it's a moral imperative "
Stop saying unarmed like it means anything. This was an individual who was attacking a police officer who had also previously gone for that officers gun. An officer who is already injured from the individual and is being charged at, has to make a split second decision and he did not feel he would be able to safely detain this man if he got to him. Thus fearing for his own safety. Do you get angry with home owners who shoot home invaders?

"I'm the only one using facts"
Hardly. Your points can basically be summarized as you thinking Brown couldn't have done any damage to Wilson and Wilson is just a constant lier.

"ruining this nation wide discussion"
Lol what discussion? We should discuss how this one black teen fucked up and made stupid decisions and attacked an officer? There are ridiculous amounts of police brutality and abuse of power out there and yet people keep focusing on the one where the officer was actually in the right.

"cold blood, not those trying to voice their concerns."
Prove it was in cold blood. I want proof that against the officers testimony, the autopsy evidence, and Wilsons medical exam, that Wilson was in no real danger and just wanted to kill the man for the sake of killing him. I don't want what you believe, I want evidence. Chances are you have none.

#42 - A lot of "witnesses" who spoke to during the grand j…  [+] (14 new replies) 12/14/2014 on Hands up! -7
User avatar #58 - noblexfenrir (12/14/2014) [-]
"their entire accounts completely fabricated."
You do realize that almost every witness going against Wilson's explanation were found to not be credible, and only I believe 1 or 2 on Wilsons side of events were discredited, 1 was for racial reasons.

"Even if what Daren Wilson said wasn't completely bullshit"
Evidence outside of purely witness testimony has shown that it wasn't complete bullshit. So I don't see why you need to say something like this when it's clear it wasn't bullshit.

"NO ONE who didn't have a gun would fucking do that"
Lolwut?
I've had to work in multiple nearby cities (I live in NY so I constantly have to go through Albany, Troy, Schenectady, etc.) and I can tell you you're dead fucking wrong mate lol. Thugs constantly try to employ power moves or motions they see as emanating a threatening presence, this is one of them.
Am I saying Brown did do this? No. Is it possible he didn't and officer Wilson mistook his action for something else? Yes. What I am saying however, is thugs do this and you're wrong for saying they don't.

"6'2" 220lb little bitch shot an 18 year old 6-7 times"
Wilson was 6'4" and 210lbs, brown on the other hand was 6'4" 300lbs. So just don't say 18 year old, he was exactly the same height and heavier than Wilson and was charging the officer. Generally it's safe practice to shoot someone again when the shot before it didn't take them down. You don't shoot someone twice and say "Oh well that's enough bullets, whatever happens happens now."

"instead of using a taser"
He didn't have one available at the time.

"driving his car 10 ft in reverse or fighting him like a man. "
What? and Hahaha wow you're pathetic. The officer didn't want to fight, he wanted to end the confrontation. Why don't you get a law enforcement job and the next time there's a crime involving someone with a gun, we send you in with the ol' brass knuckles and see how well you do "real man".

Pretty sure you're trolling now, but oh well.
User avatar #68 - GodofTV (12/15/2014) [-]
"Evidence outside of purely witness testimony has shown that it wasn't complete bullshit. So I don't see why you need to say something like this when it's clear it wasn't bullshit."
There is no way to prove he didn't have his hands up. One of the bullets entered his clavicle, which indicated that he was either laying down or falling to his stomach while the bullet entered him. Darren Wilson was taken into police custody for "shock evaluation" before arriving to the hospital, giving him ample time to fabricate that pussy little bruise on his cheek.
"Thugs constantly try to employ power moves or motions they see as emanating a threatening presence"
I will reiterate this. NO ONE WITHOUT A WEAPON (who wasn't attempting suicide by police" would PRETEND to have a gun while moving toward an armed man.
"Generally it's safe practice to shoot someone again when the shot before it didn't take them down."
Wilson fired twelve shots, the entire clip (in a residential neighborhood) at ONE individual. Even if Michael was a fucking professional linebacker as opposed to a teenager that is overkill.
"He didn't have one available at the time."
Tasers are a piece of the standard police officer uniform, holstered on the right hip. Michale Brown, if he was within 30 yards, would have been in optimal range. It's actually standard practice for officers to use the taser if an individual is that close as a gun is dangerous to use against a charging assailant because it can just as easily be pushed aside or misfired.
"Why don't you get a law enforcement job and the next time there's a crime involving someone with a gun, we send you in with the ol' brass knuckles and see how well you do "real man"."
This was a large, trained, "protector of the peace". If our officers don't know how to fight and are in fact only good for pulling a fucking trigger at the first sign of trouble then they have no business protecting anyone. They're nothing more than killers.
Pretty sure you're retarded.Oh well
User avatar #69 - noblexfenrir (12/16/2014) [-]
"There is no way to prove he didn't have his hands up."
That isn't how claims work, you have to provide evidence he did have his hands up. Even outside of witness testimony the autopsy report shows the wounds inflicted specifically to his arms would be impossible with them over his head since they align directly with other wounds in his torso.

"One of the bullets entered his clavicle"
*Re-entered into his clavicle after already striking the most forward facing section of the forehead. Both bullets that struck Browns head coincide with the officers recollection of events if he was in a leaning charging motion and was staggered by previous shots.

"giving him ample time to fabricate that pussy little bruise on his cheek. "
Either give evidence of this being a constant in Wilsons past or evidence which leads you to believe this happened. "But cops do it all the time!" isn't an answer, I'm asking for evidence specific to this case.

"NO ONE WITHOUT A WEAPON..."
www.nj.com/bergen/index.ssf/2014/07/mahwah_man_crashes_car_threatens_to_kill_officers_with_pretend_gun_cops_say.html

www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/10/cleveland_man_scares_off_butch.html

and as I said, I see this shit every day. Stupid people will be stupid, Micheal Brown was not only stupid, but also supposedly under the influence which can alter his decision making.

"at ONE individual. Even if Michael was a fucking professional linebacker as opposed to a teenager that is overkill. "
Clearly not since it took all of those to take him down. Again, you don't shoot a specific amount and hope it works, you shoot until the desired effect occurs, either the attacker is deterred or dead. He was clearly not deterred, so Wilson had to shoot until he was dead.

"Tasers are a piece of the standard police officer uniform, holstered on the right hip"
Wilson specifically stated he was not wearing his at the time. The precinct has a limited amount and many officers elect not-
User avatar #70 - noblexfenrir (12/16/2014) [-]
-to wear them because they are extremely uncomfortable and take up alot of room. Regardless, he could not use the taser if it was not immediately available.

" If our officers don't know how to fight and are in fact only good for pulling a fucking trigger"
They are trained to diffuse a situation in the most immediate way possible. You said "Fighting him like a man" which is generally the worst choice to diffuse a situation. If someone is hell bent on putting the officer or another person in danger (Which evidence corroborates was Brown's intent) then yes, you pull the fucking trigger. Just like I would expect one to do if you were being attacked by an assailant. But you'd never need protection, you can fight them off like a "real man". Hue.

"They're nothing more than killers. "
Yes, killing someone who reached for your gun and assaulted you in your vehicle, who was also now charging full force at you, makes you a cold-blooded murderer. Wait no, it makes you a rational thinking fucking human being. Too bad he didn't have your amazing hand-to-hand combat skills or he could have simply knocked him out with a two-finger punch between the eyes, but not everyone is as efficient as you.

"Pretty sure you're retarded.Oh well"
Aw, except my answers rely on evidence, yours rely on your feelings and preconceived notions regarding law enforcement and physical combat. I have yet to see an answer from you that isn't some variation of "I feel this-" "I think this-" "This in my opinion-" I don't give two shits about your opinion on the subject, the only important people in this case gave their opinion/judgment. Give facts, or just fuck off.

graphics8.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2014/11/24/ferguson-evidence/assets/reports/michael-brown-private-autopsy-report.pdf

localtvktvi.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/darren-wilson-medical-records.pdf
User avatar #72 - GodofTV (12/16/2014) [-]
"I feel this-" "I think this-" "This in my opinion-"
I haven't used any of these phrases, I'm not using conjecture or opinion. If you're a principled human being then you should see the value in maintaining a society wherein individuals are forbidden from shooting unarmed adolescents 6-7 times. This isn't an opinion, it's a moral imperative
"Give facts, or just fuck off."
Seems to me that I'm the only one using facts, you're spouting the same Fox News bullshit that's ruining this nation wide discussion. I will say this again, the burden of proof should fall on the shoulders of the man who shot an unarmed teenager to death in cold blood, not those trying to voice their concerns.
User avatar #71 - GodofTV (12/16/2014) [-]
"That isn't how claims work, you have to provide evidence he did have his hands up."
If someone is on trial for murder, as Wilson should have been, then the burden falls on him to prove it was in fact self defense.
"... leaning charging motion and was staggered by previous shot."
Assuming for a moment that this telling of events is true, if a boy is staggering from having being shot then it should not have been necessary to shoot him in the head.
"Either give evidence of this being a constant in Wilsons past or evidence which leads you to believe this happened."
The point is this cannot be proven, his wounds should have been noted on the scene but, mysteriously, no one took pictures of them. Despite what protocol dictates. Funny, isn't it?
"NO ONE WITHOUT A WEAPON (who wasn't attempting suicide by police)"
Apparently you weren't able to completely read my sentence (perhaps it was too long or challenging for you?) because I'm sure that if you had you wouldn't have removed the qualifier I added in order to further you're point.
"He was clearly not deterred, so Wilson had to shoot until he was dead."
So you're claim is that if Wilson had merely shot Michael Brown twice, this unarmed, untrained teenager would still have managed to beat the large officer? If that's the case then Wilson isn't fit to protect anyone.
"They are trained to diffuse a situation in the most immediate way possible."
In that you are simply incorrect, they are trained to diffuse the situation NO MATTER how long it takes. No where does it dictate that an officer has 5 seconds to calm someone before blowing their brains out of their skull.
"If someone is hell bent on putting the officer or another person in danger"
If you believe for one second that a teenager walked up to a cop car unprovoked and started attacking an officer then this debate it pointless because you are clearly too far removed from reality to harken to reason.
User avatar #73 - noblexfenrir (12/17/2014) [-]
"If someone is on trial for murder..."
He wasn't on trial for murder. It was an indictment, which is by definition a situation where the burden of proof is on those claiming the crime was committed and must then convince a grand jury of this same conclusion. Clearly they agreed with Wilson's account of events.

"not have been necessary to shoot him in the head. "
The bullets were fired quickly after one another, it makes it difficult to stop shooting to make sure how each bullet affected the man when he's charging you. It also is difficult to tell the difference immediately between someone staggering/falling forward with constant forward momentum, and continuing their charge.

"The point is this cannot be proven"
Then we deal with the evidence that we have. Conspiracies are nice for mulling over, but they require evidence like everything else.

"this unarmed, untrained teenager would still have managed to beat the large officer?"
The teenager who previously went for the officers gun and still was charging him after taking a few shots? Yes.

"If that's the case then Wilson isn't fit to protect anyone."
I say different.

" No where does it dictate that an officer has 5 seconds..."
An officer has to diffuse a situation in the safest and fastest way possible. Someone who is a danger to either another individual or the officer himself is putting the officer in a situation where they have to determine whether or not the threat is credible enough to use deadly force. I and the grand jury agree that this situation dictated this level of force.

"a teenager walked up to a cop car unprovoked and started attacking an officer"
Did you even read the testimony of events? It was said that Wilson approached them after noticing the cigars in Browns hands, he pulled his car out in front of them and when he went to exit Brown slammed the door shut. He wasn't unprovoked considering he just committed a crime and an officer was now approaching him-
User avatar #75 - GodofTV (12/19/2014) [-]
"He wasn't on trial for murder. It was an indictment, which is by definition a situation where the burden of proof is on those claiming the crime was committed."
In that you are correct, and I would counter with a well known prosecutor's saying "You can indict a ham sandwich", the meaning of this is that if there is even the slightest inkling that a crime was committed then there should be an indictment.

The reason I returned to this discussion isn't to challenge your points, its clear that you have no issue with unarmed teenagers getting shot (or maybe your fine just because he was black?), what I wanted to bring to your attention the curious case of witness #40.
www.nydailynews.com/news/national/witness-40-ferguson-grand-jury-racist-liar-report-article-1.2047404
The testimonial of this woman (inexplicable presented by the prosecutor) coincided so perfectly with every claim by Wilson that it had a major impact on the case. She did interviews with Fox News, who praised her bravery and candor. The only problem is that she was nowhere near the scene. And she's mentally unstable (bipolar disorder) and refuses to take her medication. And her reason for being on the scene changed (from 'visiting a friend' to 'I like to go to black neighborhoods in order to study them so I won't call n*ggers). The woman, Sandra McElroy, had lied during the trials of two other high profile police cases in the St. Louise area. In fact, the police know she is a well known fraud and still allowed her testimony.
www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDEQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slate.com%2Fblogs%2Fthe_slatest%2F2014%2F12%2F16%2Fwitness_40_michael_brown_football_player_witness_unreliability_history_of.html&ei=t6uTVMbpMomZNs-tgegO&usg=AFQjCNG4iue7l0T3x0eIfQNOoOwTD892nA&bvm=bv.82001339,d.eXY

www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/unmasking-Ferguson-witness-40-496236

This was the only witness that perfectly corroborated Wilson's story.
User avatar #74 - noblexfenrir (12/17/2014) [-]
-not even taking into consideration his impaired judgement, yes I do believe attacking an officer is well within his means. Sorry if you just don't think people make stupid decisions, but it happens.

"This isn't an opinion, it's a moral imperative "
Stop saying unarmed like it means anything. This was an individual who was attacking a police officer who had also previously gone for that officers gun. An officer who is already injured from the individual and is being charged at, has to make a split second decision and he did not feel he would be able to safely detain this man if he got to him. Thus fearing for his own safety. Do you get angry with home owners who shoot home invaders?

"I'm the only one using facts"
Hardly. Your points can basically be summarized as you thinking Brown couldn't have done any damage to Wilson and Wilson is just a constant lier.

"ruining this nation wide discussion"
Lol what discussion? We should discuss how this one black teen fucked up and made stupid decisions and attacked an officer? There are ridiculous amounts of police brutality and abuse of power out there and yet people keep focusing on the one where the officer was actually in the right.

"cold blood, not those trying to voice their concerns."
Prove it was in cold blood. I want proof that against the officers testimony, the autopsy evidence, and Wilsons medical exam, that Wilson was in no real danger and just wanted to kill the man for the sake of killing him. I don't want what you believe, I want evidence. Chances are you have none.

#62 - sexuality (12/14/2014) [-]
All of your points are legitimate except for the taser.

He had one available, but he didn't wear it on duty because it was uncomfortable on his belt, according to his grand jury testimony.

Just thought I'd let you know.
User avatar #66 - noblexfenrir (12/14/2014) [-]
Yeah I knew it was available in the sense he had one on paper, just people seem to make it out like he had it in his hand and instead chose to drop it and grab his gun.
#67 - sexuality (12/14/2014) [-]
Oh, yeah, no that definitely wasn't the case haha
#57 - anonymous (12/14/2014) [-]
Darren Wilson never said that Michael Brown was reaching for a gun. The witnesses who testified that weren't there were claiming that Michael Brown had his hands up. Those that were there either said he was facing away from the officer (Which contradicts the evidence), or they said that he charged the officer, which matches Wilson's story.

This all happened within the span of 20 or so seconds. You don't have a whole lot of time to think when you've been punched in the face and had your gun discharge in your own car and the very large and intimidating person who just punched you in the face is charging at you AFTER being shot at, which is something only a complete idiot or somebody on PCP would do.

You're using CNN, a completely biased liberal media outlet as your source. How about using the actual evidence and your own analysis instead of being a prick if you actually want to get your point across?
#44 - pxthreezerothree (12/14/2014) [-]
Brown might have been pulling his pants up since black teens like the wear that shit baggy as hell and Wilson did not have a taser.
#41 - That's a footage of a different shooting you ******* … 12/14/2014 on Hands up! 0
#52 - Don't you stick this Teen Titans Go! ******** wit… 12/13/2014 on Teen Titans 0
#302 - Suck a dick, nature. 12/07/2014 on Man made leaf 0
#109 - Creature doesn't necessarily denote animal. 11/29/2014 on can you do anything right? 0
#89 - Not the world's oldest creature - there are trees which are th…  [+] (3 new replies) 11/28/2014 on can you do anything right? 0
User avatar #93 - ChuckNorrisVsMRT (11/28/2014) [-]
tree's although alive aren't consider "creatures" Unless you're referring to ents
#90 - koshana (11/28/2014) [-]
Trees aren't animals, my friend. I appreciate your love for nature however.
User avatar #109 - GodofTV (11/29/2014) [-]
Creature doesn't necessarily denote animal.
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 1050 / Total items point value: 1250

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#9 - URLOCKER (07/29/2012) [-]
So how'd your mlp experience go over?
#8 - anonymous (07/29/2012) [-]
i wish you a glorious day, comrade.
#7 - bronyalex (07/29/2012) [-]
Hope you give the show an honest try!    
   
tbh i started watching it sarcastically with my friends, it was ls like 2 in the morning and the entire first season was in one long 9 and a half hour youtube video, so we played xbox while laughing at MLP, but i continued to watch it after that night and ended up liking it!
Hope you give the show an honest try!

tbh i started watching it sarcastically with my friends, it was ls like 2 in the morning and the entire first season was in one long 9 and a half hour youtube video, so we played xbox while laughing at MLP, but i continued to watch it after that night and ended up liking it!
User avatar #6 - ilovehitler (07/29/2012) [-]
HAVE A NICE DAY, YOU GLORIOUS BASTARD.
#5 - anonymous (07/29/2012) [-]
Have a nice day
User avatar #4 - meglikescookies (07/29/2012) [-]
Welcome to the herd in advance!
#1 - EmperorColo **User deleted account** (03/12/2010) [-]
1st

Congratz on losing comment virginity :D
User avatar #2 to #1 - GodofTV (03/15/2010) [-]
I just got comment raped =O
#3 to #2 - EmperorColo **User deleted account** (03/15/2010) [-]
Sorry bout the CAIDS...

At least you don't have diabeetus.
 Friends (0)