11 votes

The REAL problem in Ferguson

Once the news surfaced that a young black man was shot by a white cop you would’ve thought Moses had parted the sea. Blacks on the street rioting, looting, and threatening the rest of America from the video cameras of willing news crews. Whites around town attempting to find ANY reason to side with the cops. “Well, that young man was HIGH on pot and had just robbed a convenience store!”

Yes, we know.

Neither of these is the real problem.

The REAL problem in Ferguson is that people are prematurely choosing sides without knowing WHAT in the hell really happened.

The truth is, we have NO IDEA what happened when that young man’s life was taken. Maybe he charged the cop, maybe the cop decided to use lethal force when it wasn’t necessary. The bottom line: WE DON’T KNOW and neither does anyone else except perhaps a couple witnesses and the officer himself. This thing needs to go to trial. Immediately. It’s the best way to find out the truth of the matter.

So before we crawl over each other to choose a side and make a noble stand for a just cause, let’s make sure we know WHAT the just cause is.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

"This thing needs to go to

"This thing needs to go to trial."

It won't unless he is charged. What is the history of officers involved in shootings being charged with murder? It pretty much doesn't happen.

The source of that real problem is

The Police of Ferguson acted like they did not want anyone to know.
Brown was lying like road kill in the street for hours. The police refused to identify Wilson who they said had skipped town and was on paid vacation while the police did an investigation of one of their own.

For the first few days nobody knew because the police acted like nobody should know.

Then the local constabulary dressed up and paraded around after sundown like an occupying army.

The real problem is the police relations with the community it serves is bad.

[F]orce can only settle questions of power, not of right. - Clyde N. Wilson

Humans will be humans.....

Choosing sides is what humans do. Our instincts tell us to form alliances to increase our odds of survival. Gangs, tribes, religions, political parties, sports teams, Ford vs Chevy, you name it.

Most of life is about conformity to a group - doing what others tell you to do - fashion, lifestyle, what car and house you own.

Over 90% of Mormons voted for Mitt Romney. Over 90% of blacks voted for Obama. On and on.

Not a whole lot of thinking going on.

robot999's picture

True but..

it's not like we don't know anything either. What we do know: a) the victim was Unarmed b) the victim was shot 6 times c) the Ferguson cops are equipped with (and using) military equipment on civilians d) the cops are pointing guns with live rounds at innocent people e) the cops have arrested journalists f) there has been looting by citizens g) government is being aggressive with its response to civilian outrage (curfews, national guard)

So reasonable people can make an educated attempt to comment and provide feedback on any/all of these aspects that are known - but should be sure to account for the (yet) unknown.

One last point: Why is there so much unknown? Why won't the cops release the dash cam? A reasonable person could conclude that releasing this information - in the wake of what has transpired - would be a good way to add more facts to the list. (But I guess the Ferguson PD is not reasonable, or has something to hide.)

"Government is the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex". - Frank Zappa

The real problem in Ferguson

is the real problem all over America. Cops have too much power, court systems and administration are all corrupted, The Constitution and Civil Liberties are being shredded, and the country is looking more and more like a dictatorship under martial law than a Democratic Republic.

How many times have we seen this now? A cop (kills/Electrocutes/chokes/rapes/ or otherwise injures) common citizens all in the name of "public safety." They are rarely punished, other than getting a paid leave, and almost never experience half of the punishment they hand out daily.

In short, the system is corrupted and places them above the law. This can only be described as a class system, where common citizens are held to one legal standard, while the rich, law enforcement, and politicians are held to a very different standard.

This has very little to do with race. This is a problem that we are all living through. Although I do not personally advocate violent rioting, there is very much a part of me that is glad to see common Americans having the will to fight back against those who have oppressed them. I find no sympathy for the police there. They saddled that pony up, now they must ride it.

Dear The_Gunslinger, Question on Firearm Accuracy

I am taking a guess that you own a firearm, perhaps a pistol, revolver or long gun simply based on your blog name. If I'm wrong I sincerely apologize upfront.

The coroner's report stated that Michael Brown was shot 4 times in the right forearm (see illustration here: http://www.eurweb.com/2014/08/michael-mike-brown-autopsy-rep...).

Looking at the medical examiner's drawing, all the bullets that struck Brown including the head shots were all made to the right side of the body. This suggests the target (Brown) was hardly moving, perhaps even momentarily standing still.

My question is this; in your opinion, how difficult is it to accurately and consistently hit a forearm at a distance of say 8 meters (about 24 feet) if it is stationary that is, not moving)?

How about if the arm is moving such as when an arm swings naturally when walking? How about if under extreme stress such as what officer Wilson experienced in that situation?

I used to pistol shoot when I was in the Navy and I would have had no problem hitting a stationary target at 8 meters. But a moving target, especially a small area such as a forearm would have presented a much more hard shot for me and I would missed some attempts.

Eyesight / left eye / right eye

From what I hear the officer was hit in the eye . If the eye that was hit was his strong eye his aim could have been off. If you hold your thumb out and put it on a target , then close one eye you will see that one of your eyes is stronger. The stronger eye your thumb will stay on the target and the weaker eye the target will move. I would guess the reason the officer's group of shots were in the arm was his vision was off as he was aiming for center mass (chest) but if he was using his weak eye his sights would be off.

That's my take on it.

Tin Pan Miner

Those were exactly my thoughts!

I was a marksman shooter when in the military some 40 years ago. My aim eye was my right eye. If I had been forced to use my left eye, I couldn't have hit crap.

As you so appropriately stated, if his 'aim eye' was badly injured by the assailant, that would fully explain why a cop (who uses a shooting range on a regular basis) would have missed the main target (assailant's center body) so many times.

www.SpiderWebbs.com (Take Your Bookmarks Wherever You Go!)

That's hard to say.

There are just too many variables to consider when trying to apply the pattern of shots to potential scenarios that may have contributed to said pattern. There are just too many unknowns. How quickly was the trigger pulled? How frightened (if any) was the officer (adrenaline.) What caliber was the pistol (kickback)? Was there a struggle for the weapon as it was being discharged? ETC...

I would tend to think that hitting a moving forearm at 8 meters would be fairly easy to do, however, if you were the officer in this case, you would not be aiming at the arm, but center mass, thus making the likely hood of hitting the same area repeatedly low. If the weapon was say a 9mm then keeping a small pattern while firing rapidly is far more likely than keeping that tight a pattern while firing say a .45 cal. The recoil of the 45 makes it more difficult.

Like I said, I would not feel comfortable trying to apply that knowledge to this scenario. There are too many factors to consider.

Never forget

Rahm Emanuel


Chicago is in a perpetual state of crisis. Now it's Ferguson, MO. Where is it headed next?

Why did Obama come back to the White House from his golfing vacation? What evil has he and his sociopaths planned next?

Actually, i would argue the real problem in ferguson

Is the systematic prohibition of lower class employment through labor protectionism and trade union legislation as well as the massive headache that is involved when hiring an employee(in terms of tax, insurance, and other legal paperwork), which in turn necessitates the welfare state, which leads to a fatherless children epidemic, which leads to poorly developed and highly unstable children, and combining it with a drug we in which the only employment opportunity for those lower class populations is in the black market, which is also systematically targeted based on race and ethnicity due to the way populations were forcefully concentrated in the early years of black migration north during the jim crow years which has led to a massive population of ignorant and ill equipped black serfs in this country who rely primarily on breaking government ordinances to make their living or sucking on the government tit, making political reform completely inaccessible.

Just sayin...


Pretty much sums up the whole

Pretty much sums up the whole issue right here.

Dont forget the assassination of anyone who tried to make real social change for inner city kids like MLK and even Tupac and replaced them with puppets like Al Sharpton that do nothing but pimp one racially divisive issue after another. Combine that with Hollywood rap music for further cultural demoralization and glorification of the gang and drug dealing lifestyle.

We all share this eternally evolving present moment- The past and future only exist as inconsequential mental fabrications.

What we do know 80 is that martial law has essentially...

been declared on this place, and it's uncalled for BS.

True True,

That IS one cause we can all get behind - the "cops" are being given too much power in the form of military equipment.

But as far as taking the side of the police officer who did the shooting or the young man who lost his life, let's all take a step back and let the justice system work (the best it can, hopefully) for now.


Fantastic dwalters!

It is scary what I am hearing from around my town, everyone is backing the militarized force. "They need to protect themselves." Tear gas and stun grenades by force is not "protection" in my book.

Regardless, even if he charged the officer and it was justified, throwing tear gas and stun grenades into a group of reporters, including the First Amendment and free speech zones, is flat out wrong. I cannot believe I am not seeing much of a backlash from not only here but other sites as well.

They shouldn't be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There are still good people that have constitutional rights out there.