Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Home Repair (alt.home.repair) For all homeowners and DIYers with many experienced tradesmen. Solve your toughest home fix-it problems. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 01:01:29 +0100, nestork
wrote: Couldn't Wilson have shot Brown in the leg once to stop him? Oh Nestor, where do I start And if he missed? And if an innocent bystander was shot in the leg, instead or in the head? Officer Wilson did exactly as he is trained. Law Enforcement, Police, etc., have some form of Certification by the state. Any training required by his agency - in addition. Why are practice targets using black silhouettes? |
#42
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
"Oren" wrote in message news On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 01:01:29 +0100, nestork wrote: Couldn't Wilson have shot Brown in the leg once to stop him? Oh Nestor, where do I start And if he missed? And if an innocent bystander was shot in the leg, instead or in the head? Officer Wilson did exactly as he is trained. Law Enforcement, Police, etc., have some form of Certification by the state. Any training required by his agency - in addition. Why are practice targets using black silhouettes? racism? |
#43
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/25/2014 01:05 PM, Oren wrote:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 14:08:41 -0600, "Pete C." wrote: Oren wrote: On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:08:13 -0500, Stormin Mormon wrote: No indictment in Fergy, it's all over. No yet. The feds have nothing for civil rights violation, BUT the Brown family will sue Wilson in civil court for wrongful death. Make him a financially broke man. Last I knew cops had civil immunity for their lawful actions on duty. The family is sure to try to sure someone - the city, the state, the store their thug robbed, etc. but I think they are SOL on the cop. The cop is liable for denial of medical attention for a prisoner (SCOTUS); he does have immunity for his lawful actions ... The Brown family will still sue Officer Wilson. Maybe the family of the shop keeper could sue the Brown family for the robbery and getting roughed up? Maybe even sue them for being such crappy parents that they would raised such a thug? |
#44
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/25/2014 06:33 PM, bob_villa wrote:
On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:15:15 PM UTC-6, Ed Pawlowski wrote: You've been watching too much TV. The Lone Ranger has silver bullets in his six shooter. Police today have guns capable of 8 or 10 shots in a clip and may have a spare loaded clip.. http://i1181.photobucket.com/albums/...pse3541862.jpg Easy way to remember: you shove the contents of a "clip" into a "Magazine" |
#45
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
"Todd" wrote in message ... On 11/25/2014 06:33 PM, bob_villa wrote: On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:15:15 PM UTC-6, Ed Pawlowski wrote: You've been watching too much TV. The Lone Ranger has silver bullets in his six shooter. Police today have guns capable of 8 or 10 shots in a clip and may have a spare loaded clip.. http://i1181.photobucket.com/albums/...pse3541862.jpg Easy way to remember: you shove the contents of a "clip" into a "Magazine" but then along comes the M1 Garand . . . |
#46
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/26/2014 2:30 PM, Pico Rico wrote:
"Oren" wrote in message Why are practice targets using black silhouettes? racism? Most incidents occur at night? - .. Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .. |
#47
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
Oren posted for all of us...
Back years ago, or escape contingency plan required a warning shot before shooting a fleeing felon. Hmm, where do the warning rounds go? I had two escapees on the roof of the jail one night, I directed the perimeter officer that if they jumped off the roof over the fence "shoot them both'. I meant right then, not fifty yards away... Better accuracy. Miami FBI, DEA, DUSM, local Metro once served a warrant on a house for drug storage. One agent was killed in the gun fight. One of the traffickers was shot 6 times in the chest (.357?) AND lived. I couldn't believe it until I saw the guy and welcomed him into the jail from the hospital. He looked like the walking dead, but had a pulse He had a good embalmer... -- Tekkie |
#48
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 11:34:08 -0800, Todd wrote:
On 11/25/2014 01:05 PM, Oren wrote: On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 14:08:41 -0600, "Pete C." wrote: Oren wrote: On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:08:13 -0500, Stormin Mormon wrote: No indictment in Fergy, it's all over. No yet. The feds have nothing for civil rights violation, BUT the Brown family will sue Wilson in civil court for wrongful death. Make him a financially broke man. Last I knew cops had civil immunity for their lawful actions on duty. The family is sure to try to sure someone - the city, the state, the store their thug robbed, etc. but I think they are SOL on the cop. The cop is liable for denial of medical attention for a prisoner (SCOTUS); he does have immunity for his lawful actions ... The Brown family will still sue Officer Wilson. Maybe the family of the shop keeper could sue the Brown family for the robbery and getting roughed up? Maybe even sue them for being such crappy parents that they would raised such a thug? ....or the Brown family sue the shop owner for having a video security system that showed their poor innocent angelic child committing a felony strong arm robbery. They can sue, but _I_ think it is a long stretch because Officer Wilson, under Color of Law, did nothing wrong. Except go to work that day. I've had inventive excusive ways to call in sick for the day or three. © Oren - 'sick of working' - 'going fishin'' Replying to: "What is wrong with you?" Me: "I don't know, I'm not a doctor. You better find my replacement." Those were my most used favorites. I could take three days before needing a doctor slip |
#49
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
Mike posted for all of us...
On 11/26/2014 7:24 AM, trader_4 wrote: Still waiting for Holder on Brown? Did Holder ever weigh in on Zimmerman/Martin? AFAIK, after he started the similar big investigation, I never heard him give a result. AFAIK, that one is still going on. How do they get anything done around ther? Good grief. They don't. That might be a good thing except for the initial chest beating the "do- gooders" spew. -- Tekkie |
#50
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 11:37:38 -0800, Todd wrote:
On 11/25/2014 06:33 PM, bob_villa wrote: On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:15:15 PM UTC-6, Ed Pawlowski wrote: You've been watching too much TV. The Lone Ranger has silver bullets in his six shooter. Police today have guns capable of 8 or 10 shots in a clip and may have a spare loaded clip.. http://i1181.photobucket.com/albums/...pse3541862.jpg Easy way to remember: you shove the contents of a "clip" into a "Magazine" _Journalist’s Firearms Identification Guide_ http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/journalists_firearms_identification_guide/ This one is a hoot: http://oi42.tinypic.com/2ivbnft.jpg |
#51
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/26/2014 12:11 PM, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 11:37:38 -0800, Todd wrote: On 11/25/2014 06:33 PM, bob_villa wrote: On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:15:15 PM UTC-6, Ed Pawlowski wrote: You've been watching too much TV. The Lone Ranger has silver bullets in his six shooter. Police today have guns capable of 8 or 10 shots in a clip and may have a spare loaded clip.. http://i1181.photobucket.com/albums/...pse3541862.jpg Easy way to remember: you shove the contents of a "clip" into a "Magazine" _Journalist’s Firearms Identification Guide_ http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/journalists_firearms_identification_guide/ This one is a hoot: http://oi42.tinypic.com/2ivbnft.jpg Ha! Loved both of them! |
#52
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/26/2014 12:05 PM, Oren wrote:
- 'going fishin'' 1+ Rule #10: Fishing: if you are not having fun, you are not doing it right. Readjust. |
#53
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
"Stormin Mormon" wrote in message
CY: US cops now days typically carry 9 MM semi automatic pistols. That round has been known to fail to stop, at least a lot of times. IIRC part of the reason the US Military went from .38 revolvers to .45 pistols, the smaller round didn't stop enemy soldiers. Specifically, the Moros on Mindanao (mostly). They had a habit of getting drugged up and the drugs kept them going even after being shot. The army wanted something that would knock them down...there were several contenders, Colt ,45 won. Did I mention that the Moros were - and are - Muslims? They have been giving people problems for 400 years or so. They also gave rise to the derogatory phrase, "Zamboanga, where the monkeys have no tails" (Zamboanga is a large city on Mindanao). -- dadiOH ____________________________ Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race? Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change? Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net |
#54
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
"trader_4" wrote in message
And perps are shot six times and more in encounters with police frequently. Once some SOB is coming at you and you're convinced that your life is in danger, you do what you have to do. And that is to make sure you put him down, ASAP. A few years ago, not far from where I live, a guy killed a cop and his canine. IIRC, he shortly later killed another cop. Needless to say, there was a MASSIVE manhunt. They found him a day or two later, told him to come out. When he did, someone yelled, "GUN" and the next thing you knew, the guy was dead on the ground. He had been hit 65 times. Can you say, "Swiss cheese"? Did he have a gun when he came out? Nope. Did anyone care? Nope. -- dadiOH ____________________________ Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race? Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change? Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net |
#55
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 16:08:26 -0500, "dadiOH"
wrote: And that is to make sure you put him down, ASAP. A few years ago, not far from where I live, a guy killed a cop and his canine. IIRC, he shortly later killed another cop. Needless to say, there was a MASSIVE manhunt. They found him a day or two later, told him to come out. When he did, someone yelled, "GUN" and the next thing you knew, the guy was dead on the ground. He had been hit 65 times. Can you say, "Swiss cheese"? Did he have a gun when he came out? Nope. Did anyone care? Nope. Bah. He didn't need a gun. Make a furtive move. Cops will write good reports. (done by stealth : surreptitious) - sneaky, shady, shifty, slippery, sly, sneaking, stealthy... Never let the facts interfere with the writing of a good report. |
#56
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
Per dadiOH:
A few years ago, not far from where I live, a guy killed a cop and his canine. IIRC, he shortly later killed another cop. Needless to say, there was a MASSIVE manhunt. They found him a day or two later, told him to come out. When he did, someone yelled, "GUN" and the next thing you knew, the guy was dead on the ground. He had been hit 65 times. Can you say, "Swiss cheese"? Did he have a gun when he came out? Nope. Did anyone care? Nope. Reminds me of what I saw on the news vis-a-vis those two losers that bombed the Boston Marathon. Looked like The Keystone Kops to me. To Wit: - They knew the surviving perpetrator was alone inside that boat - They did *not* know if the perpetrators had planted additional bombs but, obviously, the guy in the boat did. - Presumably the guy in the boat was totally surrounded with absolutely no possibility of his escape. - Presumably the people surrounding him had taken up positions of safety and were in no immediate danger. - There was obviously a strong interest (item #2 above) in taking the guy alive. - Whoever had him surrounded poured fire into that boat for what seemed like a very long time - long enough that it seemed like a miracle that the guy survived. I think the term-of-art is "Contagious Fire". Long, long ago and far, far away I think this was called "A Mad Minute". Were the deaths of either of those two morons any loss? Absolutely not... quite the contrary IMHO.... But did the actions of law enforcement appear to be professional, competent, or in the best interests of the community? I would argue "Not so much". Wasn't one of the main faults found with the 911 response a lack of communication/centralized command? Doesn't seem like The Powers That Be have taken sufficient corrective action. -- Pete Cresswell |
#57
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:27:29 -0800, Todd wrote:
Fishing: if you are not having fun, you are not doing it right. Readjust. Jr's. Bait and Sushi Shop. Boat named "MasterBaiter". |
#58
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/25/14, 7:01 PM, nestork wrote:
I'm having a problem with that. Couldn't Wilson have shot Brown in the leg once to stop him? If Wilson had what Stormy has, there would have been no need to shoot Brown in the leg. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkIz...Y&spfreload=10 |
#59
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/25/2014 10:24 PM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
On 11/25/2014 2:08 PM, Pete C. wrote: Oren wrote: On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 21:08:13 -0500, Stormin Mormon wrote: No indictment in Fergy, it's all over. No yet. The feds have nothing for civil rights violation, BUT the Brown family will sue Wilson in civil court for wrongful death. Make him a financially broke man. Last I knew cops had civil immunity for their lawful actions on duty. The family is sure to try to sure someone - the city, the state, the store their thug robbed, etc. but I think they are SOL on the cop. It's not the judgment he has to fear, it's the law suit. ANYONE can sue ANYONE for ANYTHING. The action still must be defended and that costs money. Further, if punitive damages are sought, then the individual must/should have his OWN attorney - generally not paid for by the municipality - to defend HIS interests. If punitive damages are awarded (and never say never) it's HIS to pay. The city or county cannot indemnify him as it is against public policy. Punitive damages are awarded to PUNISH wrong doing. No punishment of the individual agent if the municipality pays them on his behalf, hence they are not allowed to. I don't know where you are getting this but it sounds wrong. Maybe a real lawyer can chime, but from my experience, the city would most likely be the first name on the lawsuit. Followed by everyone else that has two or more nickles and is connected to the lawsuit. The city will probably pay all legal expenses unless the cop was grossly incompetent and, according to the sham grand jury judgement, that wasn't the case. |
#60
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On Wednesday, November 26, 2014 11:17:10 AM UTC-5, nestork wrote:
trader_4;3313355 Wrote: According to Wilson's testimony, he ordered Brown to stop, lay down, repeatedly. Yes, I watched that interview where Stefanopolous interviewed Wilson last night on TV. Wilson said that he fired at least one bullet at Brown several different times telling him to get down on the ground (or something to that effect) each time. trader_4;3313355 Wrote: There are many police incidents where suspects are hit multiple times, in non-strategic areas, and they don't stop. I do recall hearing some people talking that were involved in gun violence in some way, and occasionally you will hear someone say that they were shot and didn't even know it at the time. I guess if it's a small bullet and doesn't hit any vital organs, that can happen. trader_4;3313355 Wrote: We know 100% from forensic evidence that Brown was already shot once in the initial engagment many seconds ago, while the officer was still in the car. According to the prosecutor in the Grand Jury trial, that first bullet only grazed Brown's finger before getting lodged inside the car door. There was soot from the gunpowder found on Brown's hand in the autopsies. Brown probably felt it, but realized that it was nothing more than a scratch. -- nestork The point is not how much damage the initial gun shot inflicted on Brown. I agree it was likely minimal. The point is that it shows how determined, aggressive, Brown must have been. A 40 caliber pistol going off at point blank range, almost in his face, is quite an experience and suggests that things will very likely get worse and yet he still didn't just surrender. There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything wrong. Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit another felony, by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop and get on the ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a fight, grab for an cops gun and God knows what else. Then when it ends in them getting shot to death, it's "the cop shot an unarmed black teen". Even if a cop made some error along the way, I reject the notion that a scoundrel can do anything they please, create a deadly situation, and then the cop is still expected to do everything 100% correct and if he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what happened, racism, etc. |
#61
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On Wednesday, November 26, 2014 4:08:35 PM UTC-5, dadiOH wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message And perps are shot six times and more in encounters with police frequently. Once some SOB is coming at you and you're convinced that your life is in danger, you do what you have to do. And that is to make sure you put him down, ASAP. A few years ago, not far from where I live, a guy killed a cop and his canine. IIRC, he shortly later killed another cop. Needless to say, there was a MASSIVE manhunt. They found him a day or two later, told him to come out. When he did, someone yelled, "GUN" and the next thing you knew, the guy was dead on the ground. He had been hit 65 times. Can you say, "Swiss cheese"? Did he have a gun when he came out? Nope. Did anyone care? Nope. -- dadiOH Similar happened a couple years ago in california. That guy that gunned down a cop there. Same thing, big manhunt, they were even worried about him showing up at the Academy Awards and had extra security, etc. About a week later, they located him in a cabin in a resort area and surrounded the place. I'm not sure they even told him to come out. Shortly after the cabin was burned to the ground, with the fire started by police. They chose to use some tear gas like device that is well known to also be incendiary. The perp died inside. There was no investigation, no questioning of police action. Of course the perp and most of the police were white. |
#62
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On Wednesday, November 26, 2014 4:38:15 PM UTC-5, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per dadiOH: A few years ago, not far from where I live, a guy killed a cop and his canine. IIRC, he shortly later killed another cop. Needless to say, there was a MASSIVE manhunt. They found him a day or two later, told him to come out. When he did, someone yelled, "GUN" and the next thing you knew, the guy was dead on the ground. He had been hit 65 times. Can you say, "Swiss cheese"? Did he have a gun when he came out? Nope. Did anyone care? Nope. Reminds me of what I saw on the news vis-a-vis those two losers that bombed the Boston Marathon. Looked like The Keystone Kops to me. To Wit: - They knew the surviving perpetrator was alone inside that boat - They did *not* know if the perpetrators had planted additional bombs but, obviously, the guy in the boat did. - Presumably the guy in the boat was totally surrounded with absolutely no possibility of his escape. - Presumably the people surrounding him had taken up positions of safety and were in no immediate danger. - There was obviously a strong interest (item #2 above) in taking the guy alive. - Whoever had him surrounded poured fire into that boat for what seemed like a very long time - long enough that it seemed like a miracle that the guy survived. I think the term-of-art is "Contagious Fire". Long, long ago and far, far away I think this was called "A Mad Minute". Were the deaths of either of those two morons any loss? Absolutely not... quite the contrary IMHO.... But did the actions of law enforcement appear to be professional, competent, or in the best interests of the community? I would argue "Not so much". Wasn't one of the main faults found with the 911 response a lack of communication/centralized command? Doesn't seem like The Powers That Be have taken sufficient corrective action. -- Pete Cresswell Another good example of an unarmed white guy getting mowed down. And AFAIK, there was no investigation into who fired the first shot that started it all. It certainly wasn't the bomber, because as you say, he didn't have a gun, was already wounded and just hiding in the boat. I'm not sure if they even gave him an order to surrender and come out. |
#63
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/26/2014 6:04 PM, J Burns wrote:
On 11/25/14, 7:01 PM, nestork wrote: I'm having a problem with that. Couldn't Wilson have shot Brown in the leg once to stop him? If Wilson had what Stormy has, there would have been no need to shoot Brown in the leg. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkIz...Y&spfreload=10 That's really a gripping video. - .. Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Anyone that walks into a convenience store, steals whatever he wants with impunity and punches out the store owner for any attempt to stop him is a hooligan. In China, hooliganism is punishable by death. While the civil rights activists are claiming this is a case of a racist white cop shooting an innocent child, the people that owned that convenience store, and undoubtedly many others in Ferguson are glad that Michael Brown was killed. Their lives will be happier without Michael Brown in them. I think your US Constitution that says all men are created equal is correct. But it's not correct to say that all lives are of equal value. Some amongst us work to build our communities and create positive change by serving our community in our profession or in our business or in public office or spiritually as an spiritual leader. Others contribute nothing to society, and in fact are a burden on it. They become addicted to drugs, gambling or alcohol or something else and often sell drugs or commit crimes to support their own addiction. They are incarcerated at the public's expense and the cost to society is generally quite high for each individual. They abuse the people in their lives such as wives and children, often scarring them mentally for life. To say that the lives of people from both of these catagories are of equal value is simply wrong. To say that is to say that person was of equal value to their community as a criminal, alcoholic or drug addict as they would have been as a productive member of their community, and that is clearly wrong. All of us would clearly more enjoy living in a community where everyone is productive and supportive than in one where crime, addiction and family violence are common place. Last edited by nestork : November 27th 14 at 06:46 AM |
#65
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/26/14, 7:37 PM, trader_4 wrote:
Another good example of an unarmed white guy getting mowed down. And AFAIK, there was no investigation into who fired the first shot that started it all. It certainly wasn't the bomber, because as you say, he didn't have a gun, was already wounded and just hiding in the boat. I'm not sure if they even gave him an order to surrender and come out. How about Mal Evans in Los Angeles in 1976? Three deputies went up to his bedroom, where he was unarmed, drugged, and probably asleep. Two fired 6 shots, hitting him 4 times and killing him. A woman purporting to be his girlfriend had phoned, saying he was confused from valium and in his room with a 30-30. The cops reported that he pointed it at them. They told him several times to drop it. He refused several times, so they shot him. It was an unloaded BB gun. The newspaper called him the out-of-work former Beatles manager. It neglected to say that he'd been active in the business since the breakup and, for the last several months he'd been writing a book about the Beatles. He was excited because it was scheduled to go to the publisher in 4 days. It neglected to say he'd been presented with a badge as an honorary LA sheriff. John Hoernie said Evans had hired him as his co-author. He neglected to say he was a Capitol executive; Capital had the American rights to all the Beatles songs and an ongoing contract with McCartney. Before joining the Beatles, Evans had been an electrical engineer. He'd published articles in journals. He could write, and he'd kept diaries while with the Beatles. It's not credible that he would have hired a Capitol executive, with little direct knowledge of the Beatles, to co-author his memoirs. Hoernie said the girlfriend had asked him to come over because Evans was despondent and groggy. He helped Evans upstairs to his bedroom. Evans picked up a BB rifle. Hoernie wrestled him for it, but Evans was bigger, so Hoernie had the girlfriend call the cops. Hoernie knew it was a BB gun. Reporting it as a 30-30 strongly suggests murder by cop. If she'd called Hoernie to take charge, why hadn't he been the one to call the cops? Why call them about somebody in his room with a BB gun? Did Evans, 40, even own a BB gun as a British visitor living in a motel apartment? It's not credible that Hoernie tried to take the gun from Evans, who was 6'6" and known as a gentle giant. The Beatles had asked him to be their road manager because he was big enough not to need violence as their bodyguard and chauffeur. He was always kind, good-natured, fun-loving, and cooperative. He'd had lots of contact with many friends lately, and all had found him in good spirits. He'd sung and played instruments in several Beatles recordings, and he'd written some of their hits. His diary noted that at one point they'd promised royalties for one of his songs, but they reneged. They were making millions, but he had to support his family on miserly wages. He stayed because he loved the business. The Beatles and Capitol had untold millions at stake in maintaining their image as supreme songwriters and musicians. It seems they'd claimed the work of better songwriters and musicians hired under nondisclosure agreements. I think Hoernie offered his services so he could send copies of the manuscript to McCartney. Evans may not have known he was revealing secrets, but McCartney said publication had to be stopped by any means. I think Hoernie spiked a beverage with valium, took him to his room, and had him sit in a chair facing the door. When he passed out, Hoernie got the BB gun from his car, turned off the bedroom light, and had the woman sic the cops on him. Nobody claimed Evans had threatened anyone. He hadn't harmed Hoernie in the alleged fight. He was alleged to be a groggy man in his room with a deer rifle. The logical solution would be for an unarmed friend like Hoernie to call his name from the hallway. If there was no answer, the apparent danger might be that Evans would shoot at the door in his confusion. So, without standing in the doorway, you push the door open and listen. In a minute, it should be reasonable to peek. If there had been a sign of hostile intent, that sounds like a case for teargas. Having cops with guns bust in sounds like terrible police work. They certainly didn't tell him several times to put down the rifle as he aimed it at them. They would have had a split second to decide to shoot. If his rifle was pointed at the door, it would already have been too late. That approach sounds trigger happy. Around here lately, a man on his way home from work stopped at a convenience story one afternoon. A state cop pulled in behind him. When he got out, the cop demanded his license. He said it was on the seat. The cop told him to get it. He leaned in and got it. When he stood back up, the imaginative cop started shooting, screaming at the wounded driver on the pavement with his license in his hand. The dash cam showed it all. I guess it was cops like that who killed Evans. Naturally, the LA sheriff wouldn't admit that his cops had been fooled into participating in a murder. He didn't ask why they'd been told it was a 30-30. He didn't investigate the origin of the BB gun. The cops hopped into bed with the murderers. |
#66
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/26/2014 10:36 PM, nestork wrote:
trader_4;3313595 Wrote: There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything wrong. Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit another felony, by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop and get on the ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a fight, grab for an cops gun and God knows what else. Then when it ends in them getting shot to death, it's "the cop shot an unarmed black teen". Even if a cop made some error along the way, I reject the notion that a scoundrel can do anything they please, create a deadly situation, and then the cop is still expected to do everything 100% correct and if he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what happened, racism, etc. I think the more succinct way to put it is that Michael Brown lowered the quality of life in the neighborhood he lived in. Anyone that walks into a convenience store, steals whatever he wants with impunity and punches out the store owner Just for clarification. Per the video we've all seen, MB didn't "punch-out" the store owner. Mike Brown pushed him, a little roughly, out of the way. for any attempt to stop him is a hooligan. In China, hooliganism is punishable by death. That is a silly argument. This isn't China. While the civil rights activists are claiming this is a case of a racist white cop shooting an unarmed child, the people that owned that convenience store, and undoubtedly many others are glad that Michael Brown is out of their lives. I wouldn't go quite that far. The real travesty of justice occurred at the grand jury when the prosecutor acted like the cop's defense attorney. Wilson should have, at least, gone to trial, as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand jury transcript, but that is what most of the experts I've heard have said. Then again, I don't watch Fox News. I usually get my news from NPR or PRI. |
#67
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
In article , gonjah
wrote: I wouldn't go quite that far. The real travesty of justice occurred at the grand jury when the prosecutor acted like the cop's defense attorney. Wilson should have, at least, gone to trial, as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand jury transcript, but that is what most of the experts I've heard have said. Then again, I don't watch Fox News. I usually get my news from NPR or PRI. Did any of them suggest the trial should have occurred because of the evidence or because the "community" should have it? (Serious question) -- ³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.² ‹ Aaron Levenstein |
#68
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/26/2014 7:29 PM, trader_4 wrote:
The point is not how much damage the initial gun shot inflicted on Brown. I agree it was likely minimal. The point is that it shows how determined, aggressive, Brown must have been. A 40 caliber pistol going off at point blank range, almost in his face, is quite an experience and suggests that things will very likely get worse and yet he still didn't just surrender. There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything wrong. Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit another felony, by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop and get on the ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a fight, grab for an cops gun and God knows what else. Then when it ends in them getting shot to death, it's "the cop shot an unarmed black teen". Even if a cop made some error along the way, I reject the notion that a scoundrel can do anything they please, create a deadly situation, and then the cop is still expected to do everything 100% correct and if he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what happened, racism, etc. We ought coin a new urban term for this syndrome. I mean, this is just begging for a catchy name. Teenage Undestructibility (where the teen goes T.U.?) Got to be some thing we can call this. - .. Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .. |
#69
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/27/2014 6:17 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , gonjah wrote: I wouldn't go quite that far. The real travesty of justice occurred at the grand jury when the prosecutor acted like the cop's defense attorney. Wilson should have, at least, gone to trial, as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand jury transcript, but that is what most of the experts I've heard have said. Then again, I don't watch Fox News. I usually get my news from NPR or PRI. Did any of them suggest the trial should have occurred because of the evidence or because the "community" should have it? (Serious question) From what I gathered; there was a shooting, with eyewitnesses that contested the cop's version of the story. That should have been enough to indite. It wasn't the grand jury's job to determine who was telling the truth. The prosecutor's softball cross examination didn't help either. The whole thing was odd. Don't get me wrong. I have a great deal of respect for law enforcement. I want to believe Wilson, but we can't just ignore the witnesses. |
#70
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/27/2014 7:07 AM, gonjah wrote:
as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand jury transcript, most of the experts I've heard have said. I usually get my news from NPR You're ignorant of the facts, listen to the left wing media, and get your news from the far left NPR, and then wonder why we question your conclusions? Uh, gee, not sure I can explain it to you. How's that hope and change thing going for you? - .. Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .. |
#71
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/27/2014 6:35 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 11/27/2014 7:07 AM, gonjah wrote: as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand jury transcript, most of the experts I've heard have said. I usually get my news from NPR You're ignorant of the facts, listen to the left wing media, and get your news from the far left NPR, and then wonder why we question your conclusions? Uh, gee, not sure I can explain it to you. How's that hope and change thing going for you? - . Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org . If that's all you got, you ain't got much. Argue the facts. I can smell bs. Sure, NPR provides a different point-of-view, but sometimes we need to look at both sides. Believe me. I can't watch Rachael Maddow or Bill Maher without rolling my eyes. |
#72
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
In article , gonjah
wrote: From what I gathered; there was a shooting, with eyewitnesses that contested the cop's version of the story. That should have been enough to indite. It wasn't the grand jury's job to determine who was telling the truth. The prosecutor's softball cross examination didn't help either. The whole thing was odd. The GJ's job was to look at the evidence in total to see if there was enough probable cause to indict. Grand jury members must hear **all** aspects of the evidence before they take action. This evidence typically consists of witness testimony and written documents. Grand jury members may question witnesses and can decide how many witnesses they want to hear. They can also subpoena more witnesses from anywhere in the United States. (Emphasis added) After the evidence has been presented, grand jury members must deliberate to determine whether the evidence is sufficient to produce an indictment -- also known as a "true bill" -- which is a formal criminal charge. Grand jury members must ** evaluate all aspects of the evidence*** and may request transcripts for clarification on previous testimony or request that written documentation evidence be made available for reference. If grand jury members decide there is no probable cause to believe that a person has committed a crime, they can vote for a "no bill," or "not a true bill," which frees the person from having to plead to a criminal charge. Read more : http://www.ehow.com/info_8287966_dut...y-members.html Don't get me wrong. I have a great deal of respect for law enforcement. I want to believe Wilson, but we can't just ignore the witnesses. But we also can't ignore the witnesses for either side, and especially not the forensic evidence. (Actually if it was up to me, I'd keep witness testimony out of trials entirely since every study ever done shows how wildly inaccurate eye witness testimony is. But that ain't gonna happen. -- ³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.² ‹ Aaron Levenstein |
#73
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/27/2014 7:35 AM, gonjah wrote:
From what I gathered; there was a shooting, with eyewitnesses that contested the cop's version of the story. That should have been enough to indite. It wasn't the grand jury's job to determine who was telling the truth. The prosecutor's softball cross examination didn't help either. The whole thing was odd. Don't get me wrong. I have a great deal of respect for law enforcement. I want to believe Wilson, but we can't just ignore the witnesses. Gee, I bet you feel terrible. I presume you're white, and you must feel totally guilty because your people are out there with guns and badges, shooting unarmed black teens with hands in the air surrendering, after the minor crime of jay walking, which isn't even a felony. How are you ever going to punish yourself for all that white privilege? You going to sell all you own, and go to a soup kitchen and hand out twenty dollar bills to all the persecuted minorities? I don't know how you're ever going to get to deal with all that white privilege. Raise taxes on the rich, maybe? - .. Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .. |
#74
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/27/2014 7:42 AM, gonjah wrote:
On 11/27/2014 6:35 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote: On 11/27/2014 7:07 AM, gonjah wrote: as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand jury transcript, most of the experts I've heard have said. I usually get my news from NPR You're ignorant of the facts, listen to the left wing media, and get your news from the far left NPR, and then wonder why we question your conclusions? Uh, gee, not sure I can explain it to you. How's that hope and change thing going for you? - . Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org . If that's all you got, you ain't got much. Argue the facts. I can smell bs. Sure, NPR provides a different point-of-view, but sometimes we need to look at both sides. Believe me. I can't watch Rachael Maddow or Bill Maher without rolling my eyes. How does one argue the facts with a person (I mean yourself) who writes to the list that he / she is ignorant? - .. Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .. |
#75
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/27/2014 6:44 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , gonjah wrote: From what I gathered; there was a shooting, with eyewitnesses that contested the cop's version of the story. That should have been enough to indite. It wasn't the grand jury's job to determine who was telling the truth. The prosecutor's softball cross examination didn't help either. The whole thing was odd. The GJ's job was to look at the evidence in total to see if there was enough probable cause to indict. Grand jury members must hear **all** aspects of the evidence before they take action. This evidence typically consists of witness testimony and written documents. Grand jury members may question witnesses and can decide how many witnesses they want to hear. They can also subpoena more witnesses from anywhere in the United States. (Emphasis added) After the evidence has been presented, grand jury members must deliberate to determine whether the evidence is sufficient to produce an indictment -- also known as a "true bill" -- which is a formal criminal charge. Grand jury members must ** evaluate all aspects of the evidence*** and may request transcripts for clarification on previous testimony or request that written documentation evidence be made available for reference. If grand jury members decide there is no probable cause to believe that a person has committed a crime, they can vote for a "no bill," or "not a true bill," which frees the person from having to plead to a criminal charge. Read more : http://www.ehow.com/info_8287966_dut...y-members.html Don't get me wrong. I have a great deal of respect for law enforcement. I want to believe Wilson, but we can't just ignore the witnesses. But we also can't ignore the witnesses for either side, and especially not the forensic evidence. (Actually if it was up to me, I'd keep witness testimony out of trials entirely since every study ever done shows how wildly inaccurate eye witness testimony is. But that ain't gonna happen. Okay, for argument sake, ignore the eyewitnesses. What do you think about the prosecutor's behavior? It appears to me; the prosecutor was bowing to public pressure to do something, so he brought it before the grand jury, and then acted like the defense attorney. Was it all for show? |
#76
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:07:10 AM UTC-5, gonjah wrote:
On 11/26/2014 10:36 PM, nestork wrote: trader_4;3313595 Wrote: There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything wrong. Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit another felony, by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop and get on the ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a fight, grab for an cops gun and God knows what else. Then when it ends in them getting shot to death, it's "the cop shot an unarmed black teen". Even if a cop made some error along the way, I reject the notion that a scoundrel can do anything they please, create a deadly situation, and then the cop is still expected to do everything 100% correct and if he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what happened, racism, etc. I think the more succinct way to put it is that Michael Brown lowered the quality of life in the neighborhood he lived in. Anyone that walks into a convenience store, steals whatever he wants with impunity and punches out the store owner Just for clarification. Per the video we've all seen, MB didn't "punch-out" the store owner. Mike Brown pushed him, a little roughly, out of the way. for any attempt to stop him is a hooligan. In China, hooliganism is punishable by death. That is a silly argument. This isn't China. While the civil rights activists are claiming this is a case of a racist white cop shooting an unarmed child, the people that owned that convenience store, and undoubtedly many others are glad that Michael Brown is out of their lives. I wouldn't go quite that far. The real travesty of justice occurred at the grand jury when the prosecutor acted like the cop's defense attorney. Wilson should have, at least, gone to trial, as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand jury transcript, but that is what most of the experts I've heard have said. Then again, I don't watch Fox News. I usually get my news from NPR or PRI. Well, that explains why you think most "experts" think he should have gone to trial. Most of the experts in the rest of the media, think otherwise. And they also think Holder at the DOJ has no case at all. I don't see how anyone could think the decision is not supported by the evidence. You have one credible eyewitness that completely corroborates the officer's account, including that Brown was charging back. Many of the other alleged eyewitnesses, changed their stories along the way or admitted they didn't even see the key parts of it. The officer;s version was consistent with the forensics. There is no way you'd ever get a conviction. |
#77
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:44:49 AM UTC-5, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , gonjah wrote: From what I gathered; there was a shooting, with eyewitnesses that contested the cop's version of the story. That should have been enough to indite. It wasn't the grand jury's job to determine who was telling the truth. The prosecutor's softball cross examination didn't help either. The whole thing was odd. The GJ's job was to look at the evidence in total to see if there was enough probable cause to indict. Grand jury members must hear **all** aspects of the evidence before they take action. This evidence typically consists of witness testimony and written documents. Grand jury members may question witnesses and can decide how many witnesses they want to hear. They can also subpoena more witnesses from anywhere in the United States. (Emphasis added) After the evidence has been presented, grand jury members must deliberate to determine whether the evidence is sufficient to produce an indictment -- also known as a "true bill" -- which is a formal criminal charge. Grand jury members must ** evaluate all aspects of the evidence*** and may request transcripts for clarification on previous testimony or request that written documentation evidence be made available for reference. If grand jury members decide there is no probable cause to believe that a person has committed a crime, they can vote for a "no bill," or "not a true bill," which frees the person from having to plead to a criminal charge. Exactly. If the bar for indictment was that there was an eyewitness who's testimony conflicts with the accused, then you'd have 10X more indictments all across the country. One of those eyewitnesses was Brown's buddy who was a possible accomplice in the robbery 10 mins before. His version was totally discredited and his obviously a liar. I understand other eyewitnesses changed their stories along the way too, admitting they didn't see key parts of what happened, if at all. The GJ heard all that directly from the witnesses, determined how credible each was, saw all the forensics and made their decision based on the totality of it all. |
#78
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/27/2014 8:14 AM, trader_4 wrote:
Well, that explains why you think most "experts" think he should have gone to trial. Most of the experts in the rest of the media, think otherwise. And they also think Holder at the DOJ has no case at all. I don't see how anyone could think the decision is not supported by the evidence. You have one credible eyewitness that completely corroborates the officer's account, including that Brown was charging back. Many of the other alleged eyewitnesses, changed their stories along the way or admitted they didn't even see the key parts of it. The officer;s version was consistent with the forensics. There is no way you'd ever get a conviction. Do you mean there is now way you'd ever get an HONEST conviction based on THE EVIDENCE? (caps text is my qualifiers.) I'd dare to guess there were at least a few wrongful convictions in the US history. - .. Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .. |
#79
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
On 11/27/2014 7:14 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:07:10 AM UTC-5, gonjah wrote: On 11/26/2014 10:36 PM, nestork wrote: trader_4;3313595 Wrote: There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything wrong. Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit another felony, by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop and get on the ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a fight, grab for an cops gun and God knows what else. Then when it ends in them getting shot to death, it's "the cop shot an unarmed black teen". Even if a cop made some error along the way, I reject the notion that a scoundrel can do anything they please, create a deadly situation, and then the cop is still expected to do everything 100% correct and if he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what happened, racism, etc. I think the more succinct way to put it is that Michael Brown lowered the quality of life in the neighborhood he lived in. Anyone that walks into a convenience store, steals whatever he wants with impunity and punches out the store owner Just for clarification. Per the video we've all seen, MB didn't "punch-out" the store owner. Mike Brown pushed him, a little roughly, out of the way. for any attempt to stop him is a hooligan. In China, hooliganism is punishable by death. That is a silly argument. This isn't China. While the civil rights activists are claiming this is a case of a racist white cop shooting an unarmed child, the people that owned that convenience store, and undoubtedly many others are glad that Michael Brown is out of their lives. I wouldn't go quite that far. The real travesty of justice occurred at the grand jury when the prosecutor acted like the cop's defense attorney. Wilson should have, at least, gone to trial, as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand jury transcript, but that is what most of the experts I've heard have said. Then again, I don't watch Fox News. I usually get my news from NPR or PRI. Well, that explains why you think most "experts" Sorry I can't be more specific. think he should have gone to trial. Most of the experts in the rest of the media, think otherwise. And they also think Holder at the DOJ has no case at all. That's what I've heard too. The hurdle for the DOJ is pretty high. I don't see how anyone could think the decision is not supported by the evidence. You have one credible eyewitness that completely corroborates the officer's account, including that Brown was charging back. Many of the other alleged eyewitnesses, changed their stories along the way or admitted they didn't even see the key parts of it. The officer;s version was consistent with the forensics. There is no way you'd ever get a conviction. Can you cite a credible source? I'd be interested in reading that in detail. TIA |
#80
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Fergy, no guilty
"gonjah" wrote in message ... On 11/27/2014 7:14 AM, trader_4 wrote: On Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:07:10 AM UTC-5, gonjah wrote: On 11/26/2014 10:36 PM, nestork wrote: trader_4;3313595 Wrote: There is also this notion out there that a black guy can do everything wrong. Commit a felony, ie a robbery at the convenience store. Commit another felony, by striking the officer. Refuse to comply with orders to stop and get on the ground. Curse at cops, give them attitude, start a fight, grab for an cops gun and God knows what else. Then when it ends in them getting shot to death, it's "the cop shot an unarmed black teen". Even if a cop made some error along the way, I reject the notion that a scoundrel can do anything they please, create a deadly situation, and then the cop is still expected to do everything 100% correct and if he does anything wrong, then it's the cop's fault for what happened, racism, etc. I think the more succinct way to put it is that Michael Brown lowered the quality of life in the neighborhood he lived in. Anyone that walks into a convenience store, steals whatever he wants with impunity and punches out the store owner Just for clarification. Per the video we've all seen, MB didn't "punch-out" the store owner. Mike Brown pushed him, a little roughly, out of the way. for any attempt to stop him is a hooligan. In China, hooliganism is punishable by death. That is a silly argument. This isn't China. While the civil rights activists are claiming this is a case of a racist white cop shooting an unarmed child, the people that owned that convenience store, and undoubtedly many others are glad that Michael Brown is out of their lives. I wouldn't go quite that far. The real travesty of justice occurred at the grand jury when the prosecutor acted like the cop's defense attorney. Wilson should have, at least, gone to trial, as far as I can tell. I haven't read the grand jury transcript, but that is what most of the experts I've heard have said. Then again, I don't watch Fox News. I usually get my news from NPR or PRI. Well, that explains why you think most "experts" Sorry I can't be more specific. think he should have gone to trial. Most of the experts in the rest of the media, think otherwise. And they also think Holder at the DOJ has no case at all. That's what I've heard too. The hurdle for the DOJ is pretty high. I don't see how anyone could think the decision is not supported by the evidence. You have one credible eyewitness that completely corroborates the officer's account, including that Brown was charging back. Many of the other alleged eyewitnesses, changed their stories along the way or admitted they didn't even see the key parts of it. The officer;s version was consistent with the forensics. There is no way you'd ever get a conviction. Can you cite a credible source? I'd be interested in reading that in detail. TIA here is but one. http://news.yahoo.com/grand-jury-doc...223558856.html |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Man not guilty of WD40 'frenzy' | UK diy | |||
Ray Nagan GUILTY! | Home Repair | |||
OT; I feel slightly guilty..... | UK diy | |||
Huhne pleads guilty.. | UK diy | |||
This is just great - who's the guilty one | UK diy |