TexasCHLforum.com

philip964 wrote:http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/09/24/ ... ial-burns/

And more looting and burning.

Police believe the fire at the memorial was started by a candle.

Or possibly by someone who wanted to reignite the chaos.

VMI77 wrote:

Excaliber wrote:Now another twist enters the story.

Multiple news outlets are now reporting that Glide, the company whose app was allegedly used to record the audio of the shots. is stating that the recording is genuine and was made at the time the shooting occurred. The HuffPo story is here - stories at other outlets are very similar.

The recording in question can be heard here.

Yeah, well, according to the article, the claim is based on the time the recording was made and nothing else. It's not like somebody might be able to fake a time stamp in two weeks. That said, even if the timing is correct, that proves nothing about the gun shots, as they could have been mixed over the voice recording. And of course HuffPo wants to keep their narrative alive. They're going to have to show some actual evidence that it's not a hoax to convince me.

I agree and the timing makes it highly suspect. The "pause" that the media are making a fuss about is easily explainable as a reassessment moment when the suspect may have slowed or hesitated in his charge, and then charged forward again. However, it is an interesting twist in a story that continues to spin.

Allegedly the FBI is analyzing the recording. Considering that they work for our esteemed attorney general who appears more interested in chaos than justice, if they were going to call it genuine I think that would have happened by now.

It looks more likely that this detour which may have been released to try to reignite violence will simply be allowed to fade away in the media and Don Lemon's record of never having said anything worthwhile will continue to stand.

Now another twist enters the story.

Multiple news outlets are now reporting that Glide, the company whose app was allegedly used to record the audio of the shots. is stating that the recording is genuine and was made at the time the shooting occurred. The HuffPo story is here - stories at other outlets are very similar.

The recording in question can be heard here.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

Jim Beaux wrote:Someone explain why obama has sent 3 members of his administration to the funeral of a gangsta robber who assaulted a store clerk & a police officer while resisting arrest.

And you can bet we chumps paid for their travel expenses

His administration has ignored the funerals of James Foley, Margaret Thatcher & he nor biden attended the funeral of assassinated Gen. Harold Greene. Says much about his values, eh?

He and holder have betrayed not only the police officer in this case, but also the American people & the rule of law. obama and I share nothing in common. I am ashamed of his administration.

More White House officials at Michael Brown’s funeral than Thatcher’s

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08 ... thatchers/

Unless of course, it was a bad shoot.

Whether the Ferguson shoot was justified or not, how would that affect your view of his failure to send a representative to a U.S. general who died from an enemy attack in a combat zone?

Pawpaw wrote:

cb1000rider wrote:

VMI77 wrote:Brown was a towering hulk of a thug that had just robbed a store and assaulted the clerk. The video of the assault makes this absolutely clear. His buddy, the "witness," was his accomplice. How come Al and Jessie aren't in NJ protesting the treatment of the young black woman and single mother being persecuted for having a gun in her possession without a felony record?

Those facts aren't in dispute at all. However, apparently the officer didn't know any of that and they shouldn't be a factor in evaluation the shooting.

I disagree with you, somewhat, on that point. It is relevant because it possibly explains why Brown attacked the officer. It is very probable that Brown thought he was being stopped because of the robbery and that would explain why he attacked. He had just done the crime and could not know that the officer didn't know.

A-R wrote:

knotquiteawake wrote:Just heard there was another officer involved shooting in that area. A nutcase with a knife held up a convenience store. When confronted by police he tried to attack and was promptly shot and killed.
A coworker was the one who brought it up to me. I commented that sounds like what happens when you attack the police with a knife. She was upset that they shot to kill him. I tried to explain that shooting to maim doesn't exist. If you're using your gun you're shooting center of mass until the threat is stopped. She said that was wrong. I tried to explain how difficult it would be to shoot something like a moving leg. She claimed to have shot a gun before and that cops should be better shots than us.... Now that I know how she really feels I'll be keeping my mouth shut about this whole incident and topic. I also mentioned that the officer in the Brown shooting had a fractured eye socket but she doesn't care much about that either, probably doesn't support the narrative she wants to believe.
I gotta learn to keep my mouth shut about these things. Don't want a visit from HR or anything...

Maybe explain to her that the Ferguson officer shot Brown 4 times in the arm. When that didn't stop the 300-pound man, he shot him twice in the head.

The head shots may have occurred as the suspect leaned, lunged, or fell forward into the center of mass aiming point more quickly than the officer could adjust his aim.

rbwhatever1 wrote:The media is fueling the fire on this one. Instead of continued headlines of "fatal shooting of unarmed black teen" why isn't it "fatal shooting of black teen who just robbed a store and attacked a Police Officer"?


National Guard on the way...


FERGUSON, Mo. (AP) — Missouri's governor on Monday ordered the National Guard to a St. Louis suburb convulsed by protests over the fatal shooting of an unarmed black teen, after a night in which police used tear gas to clear protesters off the streets well ahead of a curfew.

Gov. Jay Nixon said the National Guard would help "in restoring peace and order" to Ferguson, where protests over the killing of 18-year-old Michael Brown by a white police officer entered their second week. Police said they acted in response to gunfire, looting, vandalism and protesters who hurled Molotov cocktails.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/national/271634201.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If the media were truly neutral and working to inform rather than inflame, this would indeed not make sense. However, since that's not true, I can suggest 4 likely reasons to explain this abhorrent behavior, based on past media action and their extreme bias against a constitutionally governed nation ruled by laws:

1. Bumping up viewership and advertising revenues for news outlets that thinking people routinely ignore because they're biased and not credible (e.g. Huffpo, whose reporter held up a pair of disposable foam earplugs and asked if they were rubber bullets).

2. Attempting to increase outrage and violence to help spin things out of control in other cities. In the present climate if other innocent community members are killed / injured as a result of law enforcement action taken in response to rioting it is likely that will ignite more Ferguson type situations in other parts of the country. Remember that Obama's team looks for and uses crises to accomplish what they can't when people are thinking clearly, and every time he "accomplishes" something part of our few remaining liberty die.

3. Targeting officer Wilson in the hope that some radical will attack or kill him or his family to increase anger among police and up the chances of unnecessarily harsh police actions in support of #2 above. There can be no other reasonable explanation for the media who bemoaned the release of Brown's store robbery video going ahead and publishing maps to the officer's house and photos of his home in a volatile situation like this.

4. Attempting to drive up democrat voter turnout in an election that's shaping up to be a disaster for the democrats. Keeping the violence going as long and intensively as possible will be needed to accomplish this one. "Remember Ferguson - Vote Democrat".

Next time someone asks why anyone would need an AR or AK, there is now a fresh one word self explanatory answer:

Ferguson.

Over the last few days the police response went from over the top militaristic tactics to what appeared to be a levelheaded engagement with the community that led to an immediate de-escalation.

Unfortunately when demonstrators turned to rioters and began looting stores last night, police commanders ordered their line officers to withdraw. They made no attempt to stop the depradations or arrest those involved.

I wasn't there, but if the news reports and statements from storeowners are anywhere near correct, from here it sure looks like command sanctioned dereliction of duty. Instead of protecting the innocent, they've now protected and enabled the guilty. Storeowners who didn't want to be victimized had to arm themselves and be their own deterrent force to keep their businesses intact.

From one extreme to the other, the police in Ferguson just don't seem to be able to get it right for more than a few hours. Of course, who's in charge seems to change every few hours also. This latest twist has all the marks of too much political influence on what should be on the scene tactical decision making by commanders who have long experience in dealing with such things successfully.

Keith B wrote:

SQLGeek wrote:

Keith B wrote: The community of approximately 20,000 is is roughly 2/3 black and the police department has 53 commissioned officers and only 3 are black.

I've heard this stat trotted out several times the last few days but with no suggestion on how to change it

Should the racial makeup of a police department reflect the community they are serving? If so how do they go about doing that while ensuring that qualified candidates are being hired? So many questions and so few answers.

Not necessarily. However, any department has to understand the citizenry they are serving and be cognizant to the differences in culture, ideals, etc. No department should ever racially profile, but it sounds like some of the officers in this department may have been in the past. A department needs to understand the demographics in their area, learn to deal with the differences and address the citizens as citizens and look past any skin color or ethnicity. Perception is a big thing and when you let something like skin color cloud your perception of a person or group overall, tensions can build and reach a boiling point. Because of past incidents and the unbalance of white officers to black and the ratio compared to the citizens, it is perceived (real or otherwise) that their were racial issues between the department and the population. A department partnering with community leaders, reaching out to those groups in the city and teaming to build a relationship is what will break those barriers down. If a department builds a wall between itself and those it serves it will never develop the trust and support needed to be successful in protecting and serving the community.

SQLGeek wrote:

Keith B wrote: The community of approximately 20,000 is is roughly 2/3 black and the police department has 53 commissioned officers and only 3 are black.

I've heard this stat trotted out several times the last few days but with no suggestion on how to change it

Should the racial makeup of a police department reflect the community they are serving? If so how do they go about doing that while ensuring that qualified candidates are being hired? So many questions and so few answers.

The answers are "yes" and "the same way most other agencies have done it" by actively recruiting in the parts of the population needed to better balance the makeup of the department with the makeup of the community. This goes a long way toward bringing valuable perspectives, insight and advice into the agency. This makes it much more effective in and acceptable to the community, and breaks down the "us versus them" mentality that often prevails when there is a major mismatch between the folks in the community and the agency that polices it.

There's no need to exactly match police agency makeup with the racial makeup of the community, but a police force like Ferguson's with around 50 officers, only 3 of whom are black, in a community where 2/3 of the citizens are black suggests that little attention is being paid to the value of giving the community better representation in its law enforcement agency.

Like the tactics used by the local and county police before the state police had to take over, this is a leadership issue that will likely only be resolved through a change in leadership. When things settle down out there, you can bet this will very soon be put on the table.

After several days of St. Louis County municipal and county police turning the protests into a full fledged crisis and highlighting the major problems with militarized police for the nation to see, the Missouri governor has stepped in and appointed the state's highway patrol to assume command over response to the protests. That agency has appointed a captain who actually understands community policing to direct the operations. The results have been immediate and dramatic:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/14/mi ... -security/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://twitchy.com/2014/08/14/change-in ... y-evening/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;