When does smoking pot or even stealing cigars justify 2 bullets in the head ?

a reply to: 727Sky

smoking pot and stealing cigars does not justify the use of a deadly weapon....on the other token if this kid was charging the cop then fair call in that situation if i was armed i would no doubt have shot him as well...

but this does beg the question what kind of a person knowing that the person he is charging has a loaded weapon would do that ?

and another thing it points out is if this is the case the police in general need some serious retraining in how to use their weapons effectively......c'mon 4 shots in the arm and 2 in the head...that is some really crappy aim and if anyone wants to use the "he was scared syndrome" why would he have not hit the pedal to the metal and waited for backup,its not like he got out of the cruiser...so something stinks here....i guess we will have to wait for it all to come out in the wash if it ever does that is...with all the conjecture coming out of both sides who knows what to believe anymore

originally posted by: jaxnmarko
a reply to: 727Sky
They are separate issues. The one does not justify the other. Nor does rioting and looting become justified by what happened either. He was not shot from behind, as the autopsy showed. Witnesses are saying that he was approaching the police. I think the police over-reacted. They spend too much time practicing unloading a complete clip rapidly at the firing range instead of shot placement that can put a man down. A bullet to the knee does wonders for ambulatory threats, and there are two knees.

he should have shot him in the hand.

who knows how the cop popped off the rounds?

2 grazed brown, 2 in the arm and then 2 in the head.
one head shot was the fore head, that dropped him, as he was going down the second shot hit the top of his head.

the cop could have shot quick groups of 2 rounds.
semi-auto 9mm .40? don't know, i doubt it was a revolver.

a reply to: jaxnmarko

I agree about the knee thing however they are not trained that way and any self defense classes I have ever attended were on the same page. Center of mass and keep firing until the threat stops. Even cops with the adrenaline dump have a hard time hitting center of mass if you read reports of how many shots were fired and only a small percentage actually hit the target... Lets just say bystanders are not usually safe in a real no kidding fast paced shoot out.

One thing of interest IMO in the defense of the cop.. How many of you have ever fought a big foot ball player over 250 pounds or anyone for that matter who is of a stocky heavy big build ? In my experience it is normal for them to tuck their chin in against their chest and charge head long wanting to grapple... at least in my experience and observations... Unless they are actually trained in fighting that is just a normal approach.. Your job is to avoid the grapple if you want to come out unscathed... I could see that happening to the cop and thus the bullet to the top of the head during the kid's bull charge... Again I was not there so I absolutely do not know..Pure speculation.. but very possible IMO.

With the likes of Jessee Jackson and Al Sharpton there what can go wrong ?

I know that resisting arrest/going for a cop's gun/rushing a cop would end up with me laying on the ground with a bunch of holes in me-and I would deserve every one of them. If the suspect had done none of those things,then he would still be alive. Text

TOO TRUE!

originally posted by: Libertygal
a reply to: 727Sky
It doesn't.

Fighting a cop over his gun, and then charging him, however, probably put the cop in fear for his life, like it would any reasonable person. He had a right to protect his life, if that was the case.

However, a life of drugs and crime speaks to character, and makes it more believeable that person may be guilty of the accusations, and more believeable that person actually punched the cop in the face, wrestled him over his sidearm, then taunted him before charging him.

Someone with a truly innocent background, not on drugs, it would make it less believeable.

Character speaks volumes about what someone may, or may not, do.

Also, days before, the DA had said he had a clean criminal background. This only shows he hadn't been caught, yet.

Had it been a week between incidents, it would be a different story, right?

I don't class weed as a drug more of a natural stress reliever and something that don't make you aggressive

If he was on off his tits on meth then yeh but weed nah don't buy it

How about this. Instead of dismissing violent crime and even some other crimes as "they didn't deserve to get shot"...we instead allow all citizens to carry guns and inform the potential criminals that they WILL be shot if they are a menace to society, rob someone, violate someone, etc. That way, if someone decides to strong-arm a purse away from a woman...they get shot...and either won't do it again or can't do it again?

I like that idea. The key is to make sure everyone is well aware that if you steal a car, you can be shot and killed for doing so. Then...only the uncontrollable will still commit such crimes and will be "removed" from society. Others who are smart enough to NOT want to get shot, will abstain from committing such crimes.

Then we would have a society of law abiding individuals and finally be rid of the violent criminals and maybe all you liberal asses who pretend that depriving someone of property or assaulting them is somehow, in your screwed up minds...just fine. You know...like back in the good ole days when people thought twice about committing crimes because they would get their ass kicked.

And again...only the uncontrollable (see: Furguson) would be shot and we don't need or want these people in our society anyway. PROBLEM SOLVED!

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
To any sane human, there is no justification for shooting in the head, twice

There is no justification for even ONE bullet in the head ... and last I knew, people were supposed to be shot in the legs, not the arms.

When does the death of one person who stole some cigars, justify the deaths of several, looting, robbery, arson, and rioting?

Correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm no expert in the forensics of blood "splatter", but if Brown was three feet from this cop--as one poster said-- when the shot to the top of the head was fired, wouldn't Brown's blood be on the cop's uniform?

Again, I'm no expert, and obviously we don't know if his uniform has been examined as possible evidence to corroborate his side of the story.

i really don't believe that they were really well placed shots. i mean the cop wasn't aiming at his arm and head. that is just where they hit him.

after having his face smashed by a bull of a man, then trying to apprehend him the guy rushes him. his first thoughts were shoot, and he probably wasn't taking his time.

if there would have been a video with sound where you could have heard the gun shots, i bet they wouldn't have sounded like, bang....bang....bang....bang....bang...bang....bang , it would have sounded more like bang. bang, bang, bang, bang,bang, bang.
in other words he wasn't aiming at the thugs head he aimed and was firing at center mass and the recoil brought the muzzle up and to the left as he was firing. the first head shot probably caused the thug to start and fall and he was falling as the cop was shooting and the last one hit him in the head.

in my experience and practice, when firing rapidly my first shots uselessly hit closer in the group and the later shots tend to wonder over the target. i bet this is exactly what happened.

Smoking pot or stealing cigars doesn't justify two bullets to the head. But assaulting a police officer, then bullrushing him and trying to take law enforcement's weapon might get you a couple of projectiles to the noggin.

a reply to: 727Sky

When does smoking pot or even stealing cigars justify 2 bullets in the head ?

...it doesn't, but attacking a police office will get you a full clip !

Quit fanning the flames until you have all the facts.

a reply to: 727Sky

What I don't understand is this, many people think the boy was bull rushing the cop even after taking 4 bullets, right? Really, what threat does an unarmed boy whose been shot 4 times, which completely disabled his arm, pose? Even if it's true that after being shot 4 times the boy is somehow still trying to attack the cop why kill him? He's disabled and at a clear disadvantage. The cop could have even shot his legs out if the kid was really charging him.

But instead he gave him 2 bullets in the head.

You never heard the officers side did you? The guy went for the officers gun, was pulling on it so hard he twisted the gun side ways on the police officers belt, and the gun discharged. The boy ran, and when the police officer halted them again, taunted the police officer, and bum rushed him. The police officer could have shot him a lot earlier, however, he gave him an opportunity to surrender. The boy rejects and perished. The police officer thinks the guy was on some kind of narcotic, too.

The moment you grab for ANYTHING on a duty belt is the moment i can use lethal force. You can be shot for pointing a taser gun at me, for trying to pepper spray me, and it can go so far to be size. If you have a person who is 6'6, and someone who is 5'5, you start getting into a gray area where lethal force can be justified if that much larger person attacks the police officer. You can be shot if i start losing a fight and getting my butt whooped.

Never ever shoot to wound.NEVER. If you draw your weapon, you must shoot to stop the threat in its entirety or otherwise you were not in sufficient fear enough to pull your weapon. When you fall to the ground, is the moment LEO's are taught to stop shooting. Otherwise, until you fall down, we keep shooting.

originally posted by: mwood
A few shoots that hit his arm which did not stop him and the fatal on in the top of the head.

How can you shoot a 6'4" person in the top of the head??? Either he was on his knees praying or he bent down to tackle the officer while running at him. How do you figure that he go one in the top of the head logically? Just curious.

He started maybe 30 feet away and rushed the cop and the cop fired multiple times most likely aiming center of mass but missed and hit his right arm multiple time (look at the autopsy report) and when he got close enough I imagine he bent down to tackle the cop and he got one in the head which ended it.

I keep seeing people say stealing cigars don't warrant getting killed over, no it don't.

But when you fight a cop and try to take his gun away and then rush him again you get killed.

I agree. I feel for the officer. It's extremely traumatic for the officers, especially if it's his first kill. Going through something similar with a family member, who is an officer on leave, he's an absolute wreck. Enough so, he had to be watched carefully because he felt suicidal after his ordeal. And, I'm not one to stick up for police brutality, but in this case, I feel the cop was justified if the kid tried grabbing his gun, punched him in the face & then went on to charge him....I realize all the facts are not in, but I believe the witness heard in the background of that famous video making the rounds, that did witness the entire thing, & it did back up the officers story....

Since opinions are running this thread, here is mine,
I think officer wilson was driving by and told the two men to get out of the street, maybe even foul language, to let them know he was serious.
when they didn't respond to his request he put the car in reverse, as a witness stated hearing the tires.
The officer then tried to open his door, but was so close the door hit mr brown and the door bounced back into
the officer , so being the large man mr brown was and the officer now upset, because they refused his order , he went for his gun with one hand while holding
mr browns throat
through his open window.
thus making him unable to call for backup.
Mr brown pulled loose and him and mr jackson turned to run. Mr jackson hid behind a car, while the officer, was now in a panic and stepped out starting to shoot. Mr jacksons interviews stated mr brown was hit in the back, and Dr badens autopsy reported that the shots in the arms could have been from the back of the arms, so mr jackson was just unsure where the first shot hit, not if. Dr Badens report also said, but not conclusively, that the other shots could have entered while his hands were raised.
I want to see pics of the officers injuries, the forensics of the inside of the police car and an examination of the officers clothes.
I also am very unsettled about leaving a body laying in the street for 5 hours.
What was this other than a message to this community, in olden times this is eqivalent to putting a head on a stick.

Ex
JMO
a reply to: j.r.c.b.

So now they are up to a dozen witnesses's who say Brown taunted and then charged the police officer. So the stolen cigars and illegal drugs don't really matter do they? Nope.

www.theblaze.com... ng/

www.al.com...

twitter.com...

a reply to: 727Sky

It doesn't. However, he wasn't shot for smoking pot or stealing cigars.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: 727Sky

What I don't understand is this, many people think the boy was bull rushing the cop even after taking 4 bullets, right? Really, what threat does an unarmed boy whose been shot 4 times, which completely disabled his arm, pose? Even if it's true that after being shot 4 times the boy is somehow still trying to attack the cop why kill him? He's disabled and at a clear disadvantage. The cop could have even shot his legs out if the kid was really charging him.

But instead he gave him 2 bullets in the head.

What I don't understand is why do people keep referring to Brown as a "boy" like he was a little kid. He was a 6'4" 300lb grown man.

a reply to: milkyway12

The police officer thinks the guy was on some kind of narcotic, too.

perhaps they should be looking into what substances the cop had in his system