Renewable Revolution

Quote from: MKing on October 05, 2014, 08:44:52 am

Quote from: Ashvin on October 05, 2014, 05:53:42 am

And obviously when the son came out and assaulted the officer, that made it a very serious criminal matter.

Ashvin, you are missing the point. In Anthony's world, there is nothing that a police office can do to a civilian of color that isn't racist. Can't wink at them, can't bust them for speeding, nothing, and ANYTHING that the poor oppressed minority does is just all good clean normal activity, like in the example provided, OBVIOUSLY the cops were  just to supposed to not do their job, not notice being assaulted (after all, it was whiteys fault for slavery 100 years ago and therefore the rules are different because of what the great-great grandparents of those people suffered).

Of course it is a serious matter. Just like when Brown reached in through that cop car window and did...something. Or Trayvon Martin decided to bash someone's head against the sidewalk. Or Sharpton claimed that this young lady had been **** by a bunch of white guys...except...she hadn't...but to Anthony, FACTS don't matter...if it involves a white person (or Peruvian), and some African American person, the white person is racist and the minority person is oppressed and all laws should be suspended because...just because...

It doesn't have to make sense in his world. It doesn't make sense in your world, or mine. Or anyone else's. Only Anthony.

The son did not assault the officer, he had a gun pointed at him as soon as he got out of the car, although what else to expect where anyone could be armed any time. The officer never acted as though the driver may have been armed talking and struggling with the woman. Typically the officer was very very patient and willing to cut a break with a tall slim MILF, but zero patience with the male. Before she went to drive off the second time he decided to go to the rear passenger side and work on smashing the sons window rather than the drivers side front to stop her driving off.

The officer while very patient seemed to have a problem with stating clearly she was under arrest. Saying "that means what youre saying to me is you want to see a judge right away, and I can arrange that, wait there", is not the same as "YOu are under arrest", neither is "just come out here.......no, no tricks....just turn around" .

You see the son get out and stand close to the officer struggling with the woman on the busy road for a second before backing off, with his back to the camera. Good enough to call assault for Ashvin and MKing.

Zimmerman was seen under arrest straight after the incident on camera from the front, side and back all clearly unmarked, and the coroner stated there was no sign of struggle on martins body. That's the evidence, however the claim by Zimmerman that he was having his head bashed on the ground without losing consciousness or leaving an injury trumped that.

MKing previously said he wanted to wait and see before coming to any conclusions about Brown in Ferguson now he's reached a conclusion that he reached into the car for some reason. It seems to me it doesn't matter what the evidence is ever, since Ruben Hurricane Carter and Rodney King and the slaves were freed, fearful folks needed to be reassured.

Thank you, UB.

The instant the cop refused to release the woman without a charge (conditio iuris) to justify said arrest, he stopped being a law enforcement officer and started being a dictator.  The LAW was technically on HER side at that point. The fact that she drove off the first time means she knew that. THEN when the DICTATOR assaulted HER (you saw his body language when he got out of the car at the second stop), the cop was using force outside the law. THAT is assault AND battery. THEN, a minor who obviously doesn't know **** about the law and is just trying to protect his mom (I NEVER said the minor was "law savvy!" - I don't know what caused Ashvin to assume incorrectly that I said that.) tries to STOP the assault and THAT is considered an assault!!!? Then the cop pulls a GUN on an unarmed MINOR because said MINOR was interfering with the cop's illegal assault and battery. The mom screams at her son to get in the car because she KNOWS that cop is itching to pull the trigger on her son. THEN the cop proceeds to vandalized the vehicle, recklessly endangering the MINOR occupants in the process based on WHAT? That the minor backed AWAY from a GUN pointed at him and got in the vehicle!!!?

I am sure the court proceedings will reveal all the above as an objective analysis. The cops may be given a lot of latitude under our **** up system, but they are under the SAME laws as we are. Yes, in a fascist state where some citizens have greater protection under the winken, blinken and nod racist modus operandi than others, that "latitude" CAN turn into looking the other way while a cop goes berserk. But that does not mean, by any stretch of hair splitting legalese, that the cop was NOT acting unlawfully LONG before a bullet was fired at the vehicle!

Ashvin, if you still insist on your position, we will have to agree to disagree. If this cop's behavior is "lawful" when he refused to let that uncooperative driver who refused to sign the ticket go (saying she was NOT FREE TO GO), then all I can say what Tacitus said long ago: Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges. The greater the degeneration of the republic, the more of its laws.