stevenash

Would I have been scared when a 300 pound man with a criminal record approached me in a threatening fashion? Absolutely. And I would venture to guess that part of being a "trained peace officer" includes training that instructs you to, in certain circumstances, terminate the threat. Are you telling me that the officer should have permitted Mr. Brown to assault him? Should the guy in Dallas last night have not been killed? We are ALL scared at one time or another, so it is futile for you to imply that I am somewhat less than you because I will admit to experiencing fear. Have heard many officers tell me real life experiences that very much reflected fear. And you are just going to have to understand that the officer that you and your wife encountered did not "know" that you had been walking all day or that you were tired. The only thing he knew is that he was in the middle of a contentious situation and had to deal with it in a certain manner. The officer in Ferguson Missouri was completely exonerated and yet is still in hiding, likely for a very long time. His life is essentially ruined. The investigation ( which included a myriad of feds doing their absolute best to find fault with the policeman) found him to have handled the situation appropriately. By the way, I am somewhat educated in the economics area and would love to discuss business and the economy with you anytime.

And he was totally innocent of any wrongdoing?

I guess we all look at things differently. My perspective would have dictated that I take no action to cause the officer to be nervous. If I am inconvenienced some, so be it. I prefer the inconvenience to the possibility of something worse. You mentioned that your wife smarted off and then said a few more things. I am going to guess that there was nothing cordial about her comments. If I am wrong, feel free to correct my assumption. Once again, from my perspective, that was not something that was needed in that type of incident. I would guess that the officer interpreted the "smart off activity"( if I understood you correctly, she made more than one remark ) as potentially a confrontational event. As for the way you stood up, I would further guess the officer interpreted your move quite differently from the way you described it. In the Michael Brown case, I could not disagree with you more. A trained officer has a better feel than someone untrained when a threatening situation exists. If Mr. Brown would have approached me in the manner that I have heard he approached the officer, I would do whatever was necessary to stop a man twice my size from assaulting me.

But our Pres has stated often that this is a country of second chances

Does that mean that the info in that link is simply a lie?

And yet insists we not rush to Judgment when it comes to foreign terrorists and their "activities".

I skimmed the article and, unless I missed something, there is no mention of a specific crime that he has committed. I interpreted the article as stating that the Republican opponents failed to dig up sufficient dirt on him and perhaps the Democrats failed to also. Surely that does not make him a criminal? Of course, I am sure that soon there will be several women who ( aka Herman Cain) who "suddenly" have a concern for the well being of other women who might come into contact with Trump. (oh, wait, I believe a New York newspaper already failed miserably in that effort if my memory is correct) If I missed something in that article, let me know.

I agree with you . But I also believe that his Presidency has aggravated that divide.

He can say that all he wants but it has no more credibility than the Duke Lacrosse case.

Are you of the opinion that the guy who shot the people in the church should have been shot and killed as soon as they caught him or should the rules of the justice system have been fully implemented? Is there something wrong with "waiting on the facts"? In the Michael Brown case, I guess it is a very good thing that we "waited on the facts" rather than accepting the "hands up don't shoot" BS. Wouldn't you agree?

TxHoops- please expound on that- if you are correct in your inference about him being a criminal, you should be disappointed that your party has not fully exploited that. What qualifies him as a criminal?

I am saying that her life did matter but your current administration will not deal with it because the proposed Kates law does not give illegals ( and in this case, one who had been deported 5 times) special treatment and I have a problem with that and you should too. I don't think there has been sufficient time yet to determine whether there was "just cause" involved in the Minnesota incident. Rioting and looting are not the answer and never will be

So you agree that what happened in Minnesota was not racially motivated?

Then are you saying its too early to be making judgments/declarations about what was the real cause?

No I did not. Links aren't normally available when two people are at the water fountain. Additionally, co worker stated that he heard it on television. Looks like GCMPats has accommodated you, though.

We both know that there are exceptions in all different kinds of circumstances. Lets change your comment to EVERY PERSON instead of EVERY BLACK PERSON gunned down in not guilty of a crime. Wouldn't that be the more enlightened and objective way to state it? First thing that comes to my mind are the five police officers killed in Dallas last night. They were not guilty of a crime either. Would you have an interest in discussing how those killings came about and who was responsible? You gleefully participate in the narrative that law enforcement, in general, is out hunting down black people with the specific purpose of shooting/killing them and I very strongly disagree with that contention. Does it happen? Yes it does. Is it the exception rather the rule. Study the numbers of black on black crime vs the numbers regarding white cops killing black citizens and then let me know where the real problem lies

I have been told by a co worker that one of the captured individuals stated that his sole intent was to kill white cops and white people. Did anyone else hear the interview? Is that accurate?

Lets go ahead and make a judgment before the facts come out- Seems to be fashionable on here.

[Hidden Content]

Big Girl- are Asians now hunting down blacks also?

ANd when Hillary is elected, we will have someone in office who, after 30 or more years in public positions, is incompetent when it comes to emails/national security.

That's what we have done, whether we like it or not and you and Big Girl should do the same here.

The current President- You STILL did not answer my question as you assured that you would.

First of all, your suggestion that every situation is " a black person gunned down like an animal" is a totally false narrative that you are promoting, just like "hands up don't shoot". I know there are bad cops just as there are bad ones in every line of work.( yes there are cases of bad nurses that stole babies and killed patients either intentionally or via negligence, but we never hear about them) I will be happy to admit the officer was wrong if and when there is evidence that he was wrong. I am not inclined to rush to judgment( as you are inclined to do) if the victim is black and the officer is white) before all of the facts come out. Please let me know this: tell me how many shooting deaths take place in this country each year that involve a law enforcement officer and a citizen. Within that number, tell me what percentage of those shootings involve a black citizen and a white policeman. The percentage is miniscule- something you will not admit or acknowledge.

If we don't have all the facts yet, perhaps it is better to wait for the investigative efforts rather than accepting your conclusion ( as in "hands up don't shoot)