US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1487

On November 26 2014 18:04 Velr wrote:
Imho the Wilson case (or not case, which imho is mindbogling, at least have a process?) is just the final spark that lit a far greater looming fire. You should stop arguing about this case, chances were that 2-3 weeks from now there would be another "self defense or accidental shooting" that could have sparked just the same outrage/protests.

Your Police force is distrusted by a large fraction of your Population and seems extremly trigger happy. On top of that your justice system seems hesistant to do anything against Police brutality in general.

These are your problems, not this probably totally overreacting cop shooting a stupid teenager.

On November 26 2014 20:34 Velr wrote:
Because these are issues that don't exist (to that extent, we got issues with racial profiling too) here and speaking as if i was american would be strange?

What is this with your immediate defensivness?

Your talking pages upon pages about a case that, most probably, was handled fine according to your justice system, just because it sparked all these protests. Soon after people will be back blaming the media for just going for the quick outrage and not the actual issues... The exact same thing is happening in this tread.

On November 26 2014 20:37 ahswtini wrote:

What's wrong with using the 3rd person instead of sounding like you're trying to call out every American in the thread?

On November 26 2014 16:05 babylon wrote:
Don't have all the evidence from the case, can't say for sure whether he should've been indicted or not, just gotta trust the grand jury on this one. I really don't think I know better than them; if they don't think there's enough to indict, then I'm just gonna go with it.

Yeah, racism is a problem. Yeah, police brutality is a problem. Yeah, the prosecution didn't seem like it wanted to prosecute, and the kid didn't have to die, and maybe the cop is an awful, racist person. But that doesn't mean he shot recklessly at that very instant, and if there's not enough to prove that he did, then I think it's kinda shitty to stake out a potentially innocent cop simply to make an example of a systemic problem.

I know why it's happening, but the whole affair's kinda left a bitter taste in my mouth. Even people I would normally consider pretty level-headed about these sorts of things are blowing their casket over it, as if they have all the information they need to decide the cop's guilt, and they just ... don't. (I guarantee you most people who are talking about this right now haven't even read all the reports released by McCulloch.)

If there's one good thing to come of this, I just hope people realize it's a good idea to put cameras on cops when they're on the job.

On November 26 2014 21:02 Doublemint wrote:


might be a stylistic thing and/or based on the fact that he is not a native speaker. however, his point is sound and should be taken seriously.

On November 26 2014 22:43 Velr wrote:



Yeah, sorry, in my head there isn't much of a diffrence between useing your and "americas".


Interesting Graph about the whole ordeal.
Conservatives (Red) and Liberals (Blue) don't even speak with each other about the Issue (twitter map):

from http://qz.com/

WASHINGTON, Nov 25 (Reuters) - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is proposing more stringent air quality standards for ground-level ozone, the main culprit in smog, the agency's chief said on Wednesday.

Under deadline to release its proposal by Monday, the agency said it will seek a National Ambient Air Quality Standard between 65 and 70 parts per billion concentration of ozone, and take comment on standards within a 60-75 ppb range, EPA administrator Gina McCarthy said.

Current standards, set under then-President George W. Bush in 2008, are set at 75 ppb.

The EPA must finalize the rule by October 2015.

The standards would "clean up our air, improve access to crucial air quality information, and protect those most at-risk -- our children, our elderly, and people already suffering from lung diseases like asthma," McCarthy wrote in an editorial.

The proposal, which will apply not only to power plants but to cars and oil and gas facilities, is expected to face opposition from industry groups.

The tougher standards would be closer to the proposal drafted in 2011 by former EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, which was withdrawn by President Barack Obama before its release because of cost concerns amid the nation's economic recovery.

On November 27 2014 01:26 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:

I think that twitter map of all things is my biggest gripe about the whole issue. Although the Palestine vs. Israel map is even worse.

On November 26 2014 16:26 Sub40APM wrote:

Is anyone in this thread advocating that an innocent man be convicted as a martyr for a systematic system? Personally I lean more towards xDaunt's position that (a) systematic racism exist and must be fixed but (b) making the Brown case an all or nothing affair is foolish. Having said that I also subscribe to these views: (a) Grand Jurries have a history of not convicting cops and are generally used by District Attorneys who wish to shift the guilt off themselves and onto 'the community' (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-11-25/fergusons-grand-jury-problem). (b) the after-the-fact release of all evidence was a nice move towards transparency but (c) in the context of the way I know criminal law is practiced in America -- I mean that from the second hand experience of several friends who are either AUS Attys, Criminal Defense Attys or are in the get-innocent-people-out-of-prison-by-throwing-their-convictions-on-weak-ass-charges-out-game, the cop received a tremendous -- tremendous amount of leniency in the way both the case was presented to the Grand Jury and the way the GJ itself reacted to him. There are people -- mysteriously of a higher melanin concentration than the average American -- who have been put in jail for pretty long time on much flimsier evidence. (d) I again kind of agree with xDaunt that a good defense attorney would probably had a hung jury but the fact that GJ didnt even meet the relatively light burden for pressing forward an actual trial is disappointing and finally (e) despite what some of you claim re "evidence was presented", actually the way things work in the GJ is not the way it would work before a trial jury. I mean sure it looks like the DA would have dragged his feet on the case before anyone anyway, but at least in theory he would have zealously advocated on behalf of the state to convict him and again that reeks of unnecessary leniency. (f) finally it stinks that a relatively small amount of looting -- in the context of all the protests that have broken out across America and that do not involve looting, suggesting that perhaps in Ferguson there really was a decision by some elements to use protests as cover -- will allow the conversation to shift from "How come black people face a different criminal justice system than everyone else" to "How come black people like to riot"

On November 27 2014 03:54 oneofthem wrote:
doesn't have to go to the extreme of believing the rioter story of execution style shootings to see serious problems with wilson's testimony, behavior and how the indictment case is handled.

it is also important to keep in mind the stnadard for use of lethal force on a fleeing suspect is not met here. the excuse is there was a struggle during the fleeing, some 150 feet away from where the first shot was fired, and self defense invoked thereafter. yes, wilson got a little beat up while at the vehicle, but out in the open street with a drawn gun, i don't see how he is in much danger against this kid. he could have used the mace at that point. a backup car was called and arrived soon after. aggression itself is not enough to meet the danger standard, nor is 'his face looked like a demon' or some such bullshit the prosecutor just allowed in there. llike come on

the main issue here isn't even the case itself, but the broad pattern of police abuse in black neighborhoods. again, as was true in the trayvon martin case, castle law 'self defense' is brought up while being oblivious to the absurdity of the standard operative on use of lethal weapons. it's not the middle ages, reflexive self defense is a joke of a response unless you are literally dealing with a problem that only guns can solve. i don't see it in this situation. there is a serious leap of faith to suggest wilson is innocent simplicter, innocent in the sense of behaving appropriately.

On November 26 2014 17:48 coverpunch wrote:
I want to say this about the facts. To me, the grand jury thinks this is what happened:

Wilson asked two men walking in a street to walk on the sidewalk in a residential road through an apartment complex. It was not a main road and was not crowded. Wilson was on edge and guarded, based on what he considered to be the reputation of the area.

Brown was already agitated and excited from a store incident where he blatantly stole a lot of cigarettes and walked out, seen by both a store clerk he pushed past and by the store's video cameras. He did not take kindly to being pestered and told rudely to get on the sidewalk, although it's not clear if Wilson asked nicely at first and they simply ignored him, angering him into a more aggressive way of asking.

Either way, a verbal altercation started which resulted in Brown reaching into the police car and assaulting Wilson, at which point shots were fired and Brown was hit. Brown started to flee, but WIlson got out of the car and ordered him to stop. Brown turned and charged at Wilson, who discharged his weapon until Brown was dead.

There are lots of unanswered questions. Why didn't Wilson stay in the car and wait for backup? Why did Brown turn around and charge? What was his friend doing the whole time? But the question to the grand jury was simple - did Wilson's account of events match up to the evidence better than those of witnesses who contradicted him? And the bottom line is that the physical evidence and most credible witnesses were heavily in favor of Wilson's story, so heavily that the grand jury didn't think a trial was worth the effort.

It does appear that the prosecutor also bought Wilson's story, because he did not try to convince the grand jury otherwise or try to spin events to look different. He also didn't bring the argument, which is widely believed, that even if Brown wasn't an innocent bystander, Wilson needs to be held to a higher standard of conduct because he's a cop and he had a gun.

If you believe Wilson's story, and by extension the grand jury's telling of the facts, then Wilson did not commit a crime. He may not have been justified in using lethal force and that will certainly be litigated in a civil case for wrongful death, but he doesn't deserve jail.

It's pretty alarming to see everyone go to their corners and I'd still like to hammer the media for being gleeful about the violence there and politicians for using this to roll out their faux outrage and self-righteous indignation.

On November 27 2014 04:13 xDaunt wrote:

This is a total misconstruction of the apparent facts of the case. Yes, there was a struggle in the car. Yes, Brown then turned and fled. Yes, Wilson then pursued to make the rest as was his job. You're leaving out the part where Brown turned and charged Wilson to fight him again, at which point Wilson shot him. Read this way, the facts do support the use of lethal force. Whether you believe this narrative is immaterial. There is ample evidence to support it (if not a preponderance), which forecloses the possibility of a guilty verdict.

On November 27 2014 04:25 Sub40APM wrote:

Police officers are relatively frequently charged by the unarmed. They are even relatively frequently injured in such assaults. Their response to such assaults with deadly force is relatively rare. The Grand Jury isnt the trial jury, it doesnt have to meet beyond reasonable doubt to indict.

On November 27 2014 03:54 oneofthem wrote:
doesn't have to go to the extreme of believing the rioter story of execution style shootings to see serious problems with wilson's testimony, behavior and how the indictment case is handled.

it is also important to keep in mind the stnadard for use of lethal force on a fleeing suspect is not met here. the excuse is there was a struggle during the fleeing, some 150 feet away from where the first shot was fired, and self defense invoked thereafter. yes, wilson got a little beat up while at the vehicle, but out in the open street with a drawn gun, i don't see how he is in much danger against this kid. he could have used the mace at that point. a backup car was called and arrived soon after. aggression itself is not enough to meet the danger standard, nor is 'his face looked like a demon' or some such bullshit the prosecutor just allowed in there. llike come on

the main issue here isn't even the case itself, but the broad pattern of police abuse in black neighborhoods. again, as was true in the trayvon martin case, castle law 'self defense' is brought up while being oblivious to the absurdity of the standard operative on use of lethal weapons. it's not the middle ages, reflexive self defense is a joke of a response unless you are literally dealing with a problem that only guns can solve. i don't see it in this situation. there is a serious leap of faith to suggest wilson is innocent simplicter, innocent in the sense of behaving appropriately.

An Oklahoma school district cancelled plans to offer a religious course created by Hobby Lobby President Steve Green following outcry from activists, according to Raw Story.

The Mustang Public Schools district approved the religious elective, "The Book: The Bible’s History, Narrative and Impact," in April after meeting with Green and his curriculum team from the Museum of the Bible.

Watchdog group Freedom From Religion Foundation submitted numerous records requests for information on the course and Hobby Lobby's involvement, and the group argued that the course was written with a Christian bias.

Superintendent Sean McDaniel told the group this week that the course is no longer in the works.

"In summary, the topic of a Bible course in the Mustang School District is no longer a discussion item nor is there a plan to provide such a course in the foreseeable future," McDaniel said in an email.

He said that Hobby Lobby did not allow the school district to review the final curriculum and that Hobby Lobby would not provide legal coverage for the course.