On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:37:51 -0800, jps wrote:

On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 15:50:12 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/2/2014 2:55 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 14:42:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/2/2014 2:25 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:35:36 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Stealing a box of cigars and shoving the proprietor doesn't justify
getting killed.

===

That is not what got him killed and I think you know that.

What got him killed was trying to grab the cops gun. That is
tantanount to attempted murder and no cop of any color will let that
stand.



I agree if that's what happened. I just don't know what happened
afterwards for sure and neither does anyone else it seems.

My guess is that it initially went down the way the GJ determined it
went and Wilson was justified in at least the first couple of shots
fired. After that the story gets less certain.

As I understand it, the law requires every shot to be justified in a
deadly force situation. Wilson fired off something like 12 total shots.
Were all of them justified and which one killed Brown?

We'll never know for sure. A secret GJ decided.


If I were defending myself, the justification would be, "Is the guy
down? No? Next shot."

I'm thinking a cop would not do a complete analysis of the scenario
before each round. Do you really think such would be required?


I believe the law says that each shot fired must be justified from an
immediate threat to the officer's life. It's not justify it once and
then fire off the whole magazine.

Before you and others jump to the conclusion that I think Wilson's
actions were not justified ... that is not the case. My gut feel is
they probably were. However, there are many conflicts in the witness's
accounts, some of which were discounted and dismissed by the prosecuting
attorney team.

One that stands out in my mind is the video of the two white
construction workers who raised their hands (imitating Brown) during the
shooting and commented that he was surrendering. That video was played
many times by the media but you don't see it much anymore.

My guess is that Wilson was on a roll. Even when Brown was hit and
surrendering Wilson continued to fire. I'm now hearing the kill shot
may have come from 150 feet away.

If so, it's murder.

The 'kill shot *may* have come from 150 feet away'. Luddite says,
"...which one killed Brown?" Now you throw up your *may* crap. Jeeez.

(Did I get it right that time Mr. Dep'ty?)
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

On 12/3/2014 7:22 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:37:51 -0800, jps wrote:

On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 15:50:12 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/2/2014 2:55 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 14:42:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/2/2014 2:25 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:35:36 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Stealing a box of cigars and shoving the proprietor doesn't justify
getting killed.

===

That is not what got him killed and I think you know that.

What got him killed was trying to grab the cops gun. That is
tantanount to attempted murder and no cop of any color will let that
stand.



I agree if that's what happened. I just don't know what happened
afterwards for sure and neither does anyone else it seems.

My guess is that it initially went down the way the GJ determined it
went and Wilson was justified in at least the first couple of shots
fired. After that the story gets less certain.

As I understand it, the law requires every shot to be justified in a
deadly force situation. Wilson fired off something like 12 total shots.
Were all of them justified and which one killed Brown?

We'll never know for sure. A secret GJ decided.


If I were defending myself, the justification would be, "Is the guy
down? No? Next shot."

I'm thinking a cop would not do a complete analysis of the scenario
before each round. Do you really think such would be required?


I believe the law says that each shot fired must be justified from an
immediate threat to the officer's life. It's not justify it once and
then fire off the whole magazine.

Before you and others jump to the conclusion that I think Wilson's
actions were not justified ... that is not the case. My gut feel is
they probably were. However, there are many conflicts in the witness's
accounts, some of which were discounted and dismissed by the prosecuting
attorney team.

One that stands out in my mind is the video of the two white
construction workers who raised their hands (imitating Brown) during the
shooting and commented that he was surrendering. That video was played
many times by the media but you don't see it much anymore.

My guess is that Wilson was on a roll. Even when Brown was hit and
surrendering Wilson continued to fire. I'm now hearing the kill shot
may have come from 150 feet away.

If so, it's murder.


The 'kill shot *may* have come from 150 feet away'. Luddite says,
"...which one killed Brown?" Now you throw up your *may* crap. Jeeez.

(Did I get it right that time Mr. Dep'ty?)


No Clara, you didn't. "Luddite" never said the kill shot may have come
from 150 feet away.

Check your attributions before you shoot your mouth off. You are
blending comments other people made (jps) with comments I made.

I suspect it's just old age and poor eyesight. If not, it's dishonesty.

On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 07:30:52 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/3/2014 7:22 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:37:51 -0800, jps wrote:

On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 15:50:12 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/2/2014 2:55 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 14:42:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/2/2014 2:25 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:35:36 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Stealing a box of cigars and shoving the proprietor doesn't justify
getting killed.

===

That is not what got him killed and I think you know that.

What got him killed was trying to grab the cops gun. That is
tantanount to attempted murder and no cop of any color will let that
stand.



I agree if that's what happened. I just don't know what happened
afterwards for sure and neither does anyone else it seems.

My guess is that it initially went down the way the GJ determined it
went and Wilson was justified in at least the first couple of shots
fired. After that the story gets less certain.

As I understand it, the law requires every shot to be justified in a
deadly force situation. Wilson fired off something like 12 total shots.
Were all of them justified and which one killed Brown?

We'll never know for sure. A secret GJ decided.


If I were defending myself, the justification would be, "Is the guy
down? No? Next shot."

I'm thinking a cop would not do a complete analysis of the scenario
before each round. Do you really think such would be required?


I believe the law says that each shot fired must be justified from an
immediate threat to the officer's life. It's not justify it once and
then fire off the whole magazine.

Before you and others jump to the conclusion that I think Wilson's
actions were not justified ... that is not the case. My gut feel is
they probably were. However, there are many conflicts in the witness's
accounts, some of which were discounted and dismissed by the prosecuting
attorney team.

One that stands out in my mind is the video of the two white
construction workers who raised their hands (imitating Brown) during the
shooting and commented that he was surrendering. That video was played
many times by the media but you don't see it much anymore.

My guess is that Wilson was on a roll. Even when Brown was hit and
surrendering Wilson continued to fire. I'm now hearing the kill shot
may have come from 150 feet away.

If so, it's murder.


The 'kill shot *may* have come from 150 feet away'. Luddite says,
"...which one killed Brown?" Now you throw up your *may* crap. Jeeez.

(Did I get it right that time Mr. Dep'ty?)


No Clara, you didn't. "Luddite" never said the kill shot may have come
from 150 feet away.

Check your attributions before you shoot your mouth off. You are
blending comments other people made (jps) with comments I made.

I suspect it's just old age and poor eyesight. If not, it's dishonesty.

The response was to jps.

Read carefully. There is no comma between '150 feet away' (response to
the previous post from jps) and 'Luddite', which would indicate I was
quoting you. Rather, the appropriate sentence reads - Luddite says,
"...which one killed Brown?"

If the blending is too hard for you, maybe it's due to poor age old
eyesight!

--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

On 12/3/2014 7:58 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 07:30:52 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/3/2014 7:22 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:37:51 -0800, jps wrote:

On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 15:50:12 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/2/2014 2:55 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 14:42:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/2/2014 2:25 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:35:36 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Stealing a box of cigars and shoving the proprietor doesn't justify
getting killed.

===

That is not what got him killed and I think you know that.

What got him killed was trying to grab the cops gun. That is
tantanount to attempted murder and no cop of any color will let that
stand.



I agree if that's what happened. I just don't know what happened
afterwards for sure and neither does anyone else it seems.

My guess is that it initially went down the way the GJ determined it
went and Wilson was justified in at least the first couple of shots
fired. After that the story gets less certain.

As I understand it, the law requires every shot to be justified in a
deadly force situation. Wilson fired off something like 12 total shots.
Were all of them justified and which one killed Brown?

We'll never know for sure. A secret GJ decided.


If I were defending myself, the justification would be, "Is the guy
down? No? Next shot."

I'm thinking a cop would not do a complete analysis of the scenario
before each round. Do you really think such would be required?


I believe the law says that each shot fired must be justified from an
immediate threat to the officer's life. It's not justify it once and
then fire off the whole magazine.

Before you and others jump to the conclusion that I think Wilson's
actions were not justified ... that is not the case. My gut feel is
they probably were. However, there are many conflicts in the witness's
accounts, some of which were discounted and dismissed by the prosecuting
attorney team.

One that stands out in my mind is the video of the two white
construction workers who raised their hands (imitating Brown) during the
shooting and commented that he was surrendering. That video was played
many times by the media but you don't see it much anymore.

My guess is that Wilson was on a roll. Even when Brown was hit and
surrendering Wilson continued to fire. I'm now hearing the kill shot
may have come from 150 feet away.

If so, it's murder.


The 'kill shot *may* have come from 150 feet away'. Luddite says,
"...which one killed Brown?" Now you throw up your *may* crap. Jeeez.

(Did I get it right that time Mr. Dep'ty?)


No Clara, you didn't. "Luddite" never said the kill shot may have come
from 150 feet away.

Check your attributions before you shoot your mouth off. You are
blending comments other people made (jps) with comments I made.

I suspect it's just old age and poor eyesight. If not, it's dishonesty.

The response was to jps.

Read carefully. There is no comma between '150 feet away' (response to
the previous post from jps) and 'Luddite', which would indicate I was
quoting you. Rather, the appropriate sentence reads - Luddite says,
"...which one killed Brown?"

If the blending is too hard for you, maybe it's due to poor age old
eyesight!


Give me a break.

On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 08:05:13 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/3/2014 7:58 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 07:30:52 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/3/2014 7:22 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:37:51 -0800, jps wrote:

On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 15:50:12 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/2/2014 2:55 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 14:42:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/2/2014 2:25 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2014 13:35:36 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Stealing a box of cigars and shoving the proprietor doesn't justify
getting killed.

===

That is not what got him killed and I think you know that.

What got him killed was trying to grab the cops gun. That is
tantanount to attempted murder and no cop of any color will let that
stand.



I agree if that's what happened. I just don't know what happened
afterwards for sure and neither does anyone else it seems.

My guess is that it initially went down the way the GJ determined it
went and Wilson was justified in at least the first couple of shots
fired. After that the story gets less certain.

As I understand it, the law requires every shot to be justified in a
deadly force situation. Wilson fired off something like 12 total shots.
Were all of them justified and which one killed Brown?

We'll never know for sure. A secret GJ decided.


If I were defending myself, the justification would be, "Is the guy
down? No? Next shot."

I'm thinking a cop would not do a complete analysis of the scenario
before each round. Do you really think such would be required?


I believe the law says that each shot fired must be justified from an
immediate threat to the officer's life. It's not justify it once and
then fire off the whole magazine.

Before you and others jump to the conclusion that I think Wilson's
actions were not justified ... that is not the case. My gut feel is
they probably were. However, there are many conflicts in the witness's
accounts, some of which were discounted and dismissed by the prosecuting
attorney team.

One that stands out in my mind is the video of the two white
construction workers who raised their hands (imitating Brown) during the
shooting and commented that he was surrendering. That video was played
many times by the media but you don't see it much anymore.

My guess is that Wilson was on a roll. Even when Brown was hit and
surrendering Wilson continued to fire. I'm now hearing the kill shot
may have come from 150 feet away.

If so, it's murder.


The 'kill shot *may* have come from 150 feet away'. Luddite says,
"...which one killed Brown?" Now you throw up your *may* crap. Jeeez.

(Did I get it right that time Mr. Dep'ty?)


No Clara, you didn't. "Luddite" never said the kill shot may have come
from 150 feet away.

Check your attributions before you shoot your mouth off. You are
blending comments other people made (jps) with comments I made.

I suspect it's just old age and poor eyesight. If not, it's dishonesty.

The response was to jps.

Read carefully. There is no comma between '150 feet away' (response to
the previous post from jps) and 'Luddite', which would indicate I was
quoting you. Rather, the appropriate sentence reads - Luddite says,
"...which one killed Brown?"

If the blending is too hard for you, maybe it's due to poor age old
eyesight!


Give me a break.


I know how you feel. Toad's comment must have cheered you up
immensely:

"I must say it is fun watching you *out* the racists. "
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)