What the hell does that even mean?

Are you saying the outrage is unjustified? That the outrage in society doesn't reflect what is and isn't just?

Calm down. I'm saying the evidence the grand jury saw did not warrant an indictment. What, therefore, is there to be outraged about? A lawful grand jury found that a police officer's actions did not warrant an indictment. Why, then, should there be outrage? Unless you're saying that this is a miscarriage of justice.

noindictment.org also has information
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3QH---CYAAYiAl.jpg:large

in case you missed something

the dude ****ing shot another dude dead in the street over pretty much nothing

You need to calm down. The forensic evidence tells a different story. Otherwise, the grand jury would have indicted the officer.

The point is that white man who was armed and shot up the movie theater and killed 12 people was apprehended but they killed an innocent unarmed black teen.

Thats the point.


Ferguson has every right to protest at the dumb verdict.

I LOVE YOU right now (not that I didnt before lol), THANKS!!

Confine yourself to this case only. What story did the evidence tell the grand jury?

unless justice is a stripper's name

mmmmmm

....

Not to mention, that officer left Michael Brown's dead body for almost 5 hours in the middle of street in broad day light.

That is a disgrace!

Why did the grand jury not indict the officer? What evidence did they see that brought them to that decision?

You try to grab a cop's gun you end up dead. I guess I should go burn down a convenience store.

The American justice system has spoken. Now STFU.

Than you know the struggle. Not everyone is that strong. For every 1000 gangbangers there is probably/maybe one person who doesn't get sucked into the life and makes something of themselves. I can't even imagine what it's like growing up in a ghetto environment. At the end of the day I believe it is on the people of those communities to take responsibility and make a better life for themselves, but I also see how they are basically setup for failure.

Didn't realize we were talking about this here. My thread is useless.

Your excessive faith in the grand jury is disturbing. You oughtta wisen the **** up because your attitude here is part of the problem in society.

Let's just play devil's advocate here.

Wilson sees two black men jay walking. Tells them to get on the street. They don't. Kinda ****ty, sure, but really not that bad of a thing to do. The correct response would be to pull up and politely ask again. Let's say that's what happened. Brown and his friend still don't comply, Wilson allegedly recognizes him as the man who stole- what was it, 3 swishersweets? About 7$ worth of merchandise? Officer attempts to arrest brown, an altercation allegedly ensues, Brown is shot at, flees, Wilson gets out of his car, resumes firing at least six shots in the open street possibly as close as two feet away from Brown, hits him twice in the head no less, and leaves his body in the street for 5 ****ing hours. Yeah, let's just go ahead and shoot everyone that steals 7$ worth of ****ing cigars and tries to get away with. If Wilson really did even recognize him. I mean honestly, you really think cops are gonna pay that much attention to something that petty?

"I made a better life for myself, why can't you?"

**** this mentality. This is sick.

You DO realize that a jury is basically a vote and that people have been voting for completely f*cked up things since the dawn of time right?

I'm waiting for an answer. Why did they not indict him? What evidence convinced them to make the decision they did?

Wow so there is sanity in this forum, THANKS

Dude... they listened to 30 hours of evidence.

I understand that. I'm wondering what precisely that evidence is. Eyewitness accounts? Forensic evidence? What brought them to their decision? Is the grand jury corrupt, or is there clear-cut evidence of no misconduct?

The boy tried to take a gun off a cop.

I don't think they have officially released this information.

My whole point is that there is an unstable amount of racial tension right now and for them to make this decision, announce it at 8:00 at night, when they KNEW what the reaction would be...is just wrong. Drag it out. Let the tension subside before you make your case or more people are going to die.

also to be honest while white trash areas might be poor it is very different from a lot of more urban areas. being froma trailer park or something you might have the incentive to start cooking meth or something but its not as extreme as being from the ghetto. if you constantly see that the only people around you who have any kind of money are cut throat criminals/drug dealers then it gets really tempting to start buying into that lifestyle. and if you consistently see people getting ****ed up or killed over that kind of **** it desensitizes you towards it and makes you think **** it, every man for himself.

They did that on purpose because they want people to protest. They instigated the riots.

First of all I would like to say I AGREE, this situation may possibly have been handled better (at the very least, wait till morning!!), but at the same time, I think you have to look at this from the officer's standpoint. If the jury does not believe he was in the wrong and a trial should (not) be arraigned, he should not be treated as a criminal for a second longer than he should be. An officer of the court should have notified him...quietly, than announce it to everybody else in the morning.

He should not be treated as a criminal after killing someone but ya'll think Bill Cosby is a rapist?

lol ok

We'll have to wait until the evidence the grand jury saw is made public before we can start saying that justice hasn't been served. If the evidence is such that the officer should have been indicted, then there is a reason for rebellion against the government. If the evidence, however, exonerates the officer, then there's no support for any protests. Either way, there should be reaction from the public until the public knows the evidence.

This is 110% ridiculous, and it doesn't even make any sense! Why would a public official (the DA of all ****ing people) want the city to riot??

i haven't followed this case closely enough to say for sure whether i think the cop is guilty or not tbh. on instinct i feel like he probably is. but people rioting and tearing up their own neighborhood are dumb as **** either way.

A conspiracy nut might say that they want people to riot so they can justify the further militarization of police.

Are you this naive?

They BEEN knew that verdict. T

They PURPOSELY revealed it at night because they knew those black people were going to riot and protest.

Why do you think they brought the National Guard out? lol

They knew what the verdict was going to be!

not such a crazy theory compared to most conspiracy theories tbh. though i think they need little justification to continue militarizing the police force. they basically know they can do what they want and people might bitch about it but nobody can really stop them.

No matter the instigation, each man and woman still has a personal choice to riot or not. In the end, all behavior comes down to personal choice.

What we are seeing is police brutality.

Abusing a obviously hurt community...just because they can.

http://picardfacepalm.com/picard-facepalm-hotlink.jpg



Good grief. That's just as ridiculous as whatever soulflower is spewing.

^I agree. I don't believe that, but I've got lots of conspiracy-nut friends, so I'm familiar with the way they think.

I don't see how that's ridiculous. That is a pretty reasonable conclusion for a conspiracy theorist. I can give you plenty of other examples of other things way more far fetched.