Yeah, you might want to hide behind the supposed context, but that was the first of many posts from you which agreed with the MSM conventional wisdom; to wit that
‘the cop shot an unarmed teenager in the back as he was trying to escape the bad policeman’.
We are going to find out that this was/is an ordinary cop, armed as an ordinary cop just doing the kind of duty we all want; keeping the peace in an uncivilized territory. That’s’ something I know that you don’t.
BTW the constant attempt to bait off me using phases ‘Like a Leftist’ etc. doesn’t work with me. Not that I mind your frothing.
There you go again.
I never had any ‘agreement’ with ‘conventional wisdom’ of the MSM. My questions and comments were (and continue to be) in regards to what was reported at the time it was reported.
That police in this country have become militarized and routinely act outside of what used to constitute a peace officer is the springboard for the comments and questions made in this situation. Especially given how the Executive stated his desire to create a militarized civilian security force. That bodes evil for every liberty-loving American in the country.
That you insist this was ‘an ordinary cop’ “doing what we all want” - does not comport with what I used to understand the definition of ‘ordinary cop’ to be.
Batons, Mace and more recently tasters were used to effect an arrest once upon a time. If ‘keeping the peace’ includes emptying a magazine into perps whenever a cop ‘feels threatened’ - you are one who will enjoy living in a police state.
That is until it is turned on you.
Shooting an unarmed perp multiple times as a legal and policy precedent should worry us and prompt us to make the same arguments I have made if we do not want to live under a police state. But you and those like you apparently do.
We have a litany of example of cops shooting family pets, acting like armed gestapo and not peace officers. My arguments are centered from those observations and in reaction to the reports from Ferguson we had at the time they were made.
Ghetto thugs are ghetto thugs and I have no sympathy for them. Brown apparently deserved his fate considering information that has been released in the last 24 hours.
That said, Ghetto thugs do not pose a clear and present danger to our liberty and our rights however. A militarized civilian security force (formerly known as Police) are a more direct threat to those things. Will this case create a precedent that police have authority to empty magazines into unarmed perps anytime they feel threatened? Will the criteria for such be whatever is deemed to be so by the police themselves?
I trust an armed citizenry far more than I will ever trust an institution of the state. A people who give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, they deserve neither Liberty nor Safety and indeed will end up having neither.