Questions for the Brown defenders (all minus Dickwidth I guess lol),
Are you guys disputing the details of exactly how this unfolded, or do you agree with the details - Brown reaching for gun, charging Wilson, etc. - but feel the solution should have been non-fatal?
If the latter,
What exactly, if anything, would Brown have had to do to justify Wilson putting him down?
I.e. what possible alternate series of decisions made by Brown would warrant this tragic outcome?
What I can't figure out is why Wilson, who apparently had never fired his gun in his 5 year career, just all of the sudden decides to gun down an UNARMED black kid. In broad daylight. With people watching.
Yeah I know I said I was ducking out of this thread... sue me.
The facts as well as the grand jury instructions are all in dispute but it generally agreed that there was some sort of scuffle between Brown and Wilson. The officer having never fired his gun is irrelevant. People with no prior history go into a rage and kill people all the time. The problem is cops unloading entire clips of ammo into people on an all too regular basis. They just shot a 12 year old kid with in 2 seconds of arriving on a scene of the kid sitting by himself at a park bench with an air soft gun. Once Brown fled from the car, Wilson could have stayed in the car and waited for the back up he had already called and which showed up right after Wilson shot Brown. Wilson made a decision to get out of the car and put himself in a situation where he felt he had to kill someone to survive. Wilson even said he felt like he was wrestling with the "Hulk" in the car. All the more reason to wait for back up and get out the taserers. Not jump out of the car and start shooting. Oh, and you can barely see any injuries on Wilson in the pictures so he's appears to be over exaggerating the veracity of the attack to justify a killing. Brown would have to be charging the officer with a weapon to justify "taking him down".
di·ver·si·ty (d-vûrs-t, d-)
a. The fact or quality of being diverse; difference.
b. A point or respect in which things differ
tol·er·ance/ˈtäl(ə)rəns/
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.
Isn't this why MLK preached nonviolence and civil rights in civil court? Because he knew that the best disinfectant for wrong is daylight. That to present and expose this in full view of the public, that no decent human authority despite dogma cannot stand opposed to this.
Soul Zilla I want you to know I read your whole post. I appreciated the thought you have given this and the time you put into your post.
You make one common historical error that I think it is important to correct.
Martin Luther King never preached civil rights in civil court.
King preached the opposite, civil rights in the streets.
In 1956, when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat, she knew that NAACP was looking for a case to take to court to dispute Montgomery's segregated bus laws. She did not know about MLK, a young preacher who had just moved to town, and his views on non-violent confrontation. The NAACP was a long established organization that looked to use the courts to correct injustice. MLK believed the courts were too slow and too prejudiced. He believed in direct confrontation. Thus he started the Montgomery Bus Boycott, he continued his non-violent confrontational tactics with marches from Selma to Chicago. His organization, the Southern Christian Leadership Council, organized protests, not court cases.
Questions for the Brown defenders (all minus Dickwidth I guess lol),
Are you guys disputing the details of exactly how this unfolded, or do you agree with the details - Brown reaching for gun, charging Wilson, etc. - but feel the solution should have been non-fatal?
If the latter,
What exactly, if anything, would Brown have had to do to justify Wilson putting him down?
I.e. what possible alternate series of decisions made by Brown would warrant this tragic outcome?
What I can't figure out is why Wilson, who apparently had never fired his gun in his 5 year career, just all of the sudden decides to gun down an UNARMED black kid. In broad daylight. With people watching.
Yeah I know I said I was ducking out of this thread... sue me.
I feel like I've answered tall of this already, but maybe that was in another forum.
Wilson didn't "decide" to do anything in a rational sense. He panicked. For some reason he felt so physically overmatched by Brown that he shot at him 12 times out of pure blind fear.
I do believe Brown had his hands up as he turned around to face his killer. You have to tell me why you think 15 or so witnesses were lying about that, and why you dismiss the video of the construction workers, in real time, watching the killing. It seems to me that accepting Wilson's version of events completely is the real odd choice.
By the way, your use of "putting him down" makes me think you're as much of an asshole as Dickwidth is. What's that about?
di·ver·si·ty (d-vûrs-t, d-)
a. The fact or quality of being diverse; difference.
b. A point or respect in which things differ
tol·er·ance/ˈtäl(ə)rəns/
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.
I guess the point is that people should just shut up and accept it when cops gun down unarmed people, no matter how many times it happens.
If I ever get that tolerant someone just put a pillow over my face.
di·ver·si·ty (d-vûrs-t, d-)
a. The fact or quality of being diverse; difference.
b. A point or respect in which things differ
tol·er·ance/ˈtäl(ə)rəns/
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.
I guess the point is that people should just shut up and accept it when cops gun down unarmed people, no matter how many times it happens.
If I ever get that tolerant someone just put a pillow over my face.
I could be wrong here, but I believe he was just suggesting that Dickwidth get the banhammer. C.H.I.L.L.
di·ver·si·ty (d-vûrs-t, d-)
a. The fact or quality of being diverse; difference.
b. A point or respect in which things differ
tol·er·ance/ˈtäl(ə)rəns/
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.
I guess the point is that people should just shut up and accept it when cops gun down unarmed people, no matter how many times it happens.
If I ever get that tolerant someone just put a pillow over my face.
I could be wrong here, but I believe he was just suggesting that Dickwidth get the banhammer. C.H.I.L.L.
I could be wrong, but I thought it could've been in reference to my judgmental poast, of which I can only say that I was just giving the troll what he wanted. Apologies, note-to-self not to feed.
di·ver·si·ty (d-vûrs-t, d-)
a. The fact or quality of being diverse; difference.
b. A point or respect in which things differ
tol·er·ance/ˈtäl(ə)rəns/
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.
This post is exactly why it even has to be spelled out that black lives matter. Never mind that the notion of diversity and tolerance are false premises to base justification for shooting a teenager six times - all while he was in a state of surrender or collapse - but that his life was some sort of abstraction, a matter of opinion whether or not he should have been allowed to live.
People are twisting every last bit of logic and history and using every selective piece of bullshit to excuse Wilson while Brown never got an iota of the same breathing room for a possible bad decision to JAY WALK.
People waited patiently from August for justice to be done. The reaction to the grand jury decision - which has been exaggerated and lied about as predominantly violent and used as deflection from the real issues - is actually measured given the circumstances. Expecting people to be told that they don't matter, that their children don't matter, their rights and their freedoms and safety and lives don't matter, and to just nod and take it...that is just another way to dehumanise them. Exactly how much are people supposed to take?
The capacity for empathy for Wilson is limitless and sports-related and frat riots are laughed off, but people are supposed to quietly turn away from another modern day lynching?
It's admirable you all can put this aside and share a drink. I can't even convince myself that I even want to talk about music on this board anymore.
di·ver·si·ty (d-vûrs-t, d-)
a. The fact or quality of being diverse; difference.
b. A point or respect in which things differ
tol·er·ance/ˈtäl(ə)rəns/
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.
I guess the point is that people should just shut up and accept it when cops gun down unarmed people, no matter how many times it happens.
If I ever get that tolerant someone just put a pillow over my face.
I could be wrong here, but I believe he was just suggesting that Dickwidth get the banhammer. C.H.I.L.L.
Make that two people who read the original post from the original poster the same way. It doesn't change anything I wrote, just the attribution if I misread it.
And C.H.I.L.L. doesn't change shit.
I really hope you endure this and stay. The Strut would be less without you and your voice.
As for the folks who are turning this into some political talking point or some absurd abstraction, shame on you. Shame. Here is some fucking truth for you...
Hey og strutters. Don't go! I missed the boat back in the day. I think josh b (b-cause) told me about it but I thought he meant soulseek or something.
But I'm here now and it's still a real dope site.
/thread jack.
bassie's right. it's clear why poasters too numerous to name don't fuck with this site anymore. I don't have the time or energy to engage with anonymous trolls, or a site that doesn't feel it's necessary to ban them. See you guys when I see you.
bassie's right. it's clear why poasters too numerous to name don't fuck with this site anymore. I don't have the time or energy to engage with anonymous trolls, or a site that doesn't feel it's necessary to ban them. See you guys when I see you.
Not for nothing. But do bans really work? It's very easy to go around them. And I'm pretty sure over the past number of years the people that come here on some bullshit are the same couple of people. Just going around the initial bans.
And they strictly do it to fuck with people and it obviously works... Anyone that leaves the board over what some dickhead wrote, I'm guessing deep at the heart of it is leaving for other reasons. The troll is just the straw that breaks the camels back.
It's slightly depressing to see people get run off the board. There have been many many great posters. But I also remember when some mods banned a few people and it pissed off a bunch of people.
But in the last few years, if I honestly thought that banning certain posters would keep the great posters here, I would say ban every last one of them. But I'm not sure it would...
I just wish some would stop engaging bullshit that doesn't offer anything of real value to the conversation when it's on a subject like the OG post. Every time I read someones reply post that I completely agree with, I wish I could just say "Could you fucking not reply", because it only adds to the trolls excitement that they are pulling them down to their level.
It's like trying to win an argument on a youtube video. Someone is looking for attention or a reaction and they win every time they are engaged.
wait are you guys talking about banning that old geezer who forgot which message board he was posting on earlier since he spreads his hateful drivel throughout the internet or banning people in order to preserve the soulstrut political echo chamber
But do bans really work? It's very easy to go around them. And I'm pretty sure over the past number of years the people that come here on some bullshit are the same couple of people. Just going around the initial bans.
And they strictly do it to fuck with people and it obviously works... Anyone that leaves the board over what some dickhead wrote, I'm guessing deep at the heart of it is leaving for other reasons. The troll is just the straw that breaks the camels back.
It's slightly depressing to see people get run off the board. There have been many many great posters. But I also remember when some mods banned a few people and it pissed off a bunch of people.
But in the last few years, if I honestly thought that banning certain posters would keep the great posters here, I would say ban every last one of them. But I'm not sure it would...
I just wish some would stop engaging bullshit that doesn't offer anything of real value to the conversation when it's on a subject like the OG post. Every time I read someones reply post that I completely agree with, I wish I could just say "Could you fucking not reply", because it only adds to the trolls excitement that they are pulling them down to their level.
It's like trying to win an argument on a youtube video. Someone is looking for attention or a reaction and they win every time they are engaged.
I've never been a fan of bans. I didn't think they were necessary when there were a lot more music-minded posters and there were more perspectives and opinions across the board, be it about music, shoes or presidential elections. The music talk would dominate and the place would self-regulate. That is not the case anymore. Maybe a clean slate reset brought about by no political posts is necessary, I don't know. Is traffic more important than content? That's for Raj to decide.
I think the type of drop-bys we get says a lot. I also don't think there is that much difference in opinions being expressed by new trolls and some old posters; the main difference being status and music-related contributions...though with the latter, even that is questionable in some cases.
DOR said:
deep at the heart of it is leaving for other reasons.
A lot of former contributors have said as much - life, schedules, new families, etc.
Some present posters, like myself, can't stomach the predominant opinions being expressed with no vibrant music talk to balance it out. In my real life I don't keep company with rape apologists, people who support murdering civilians or willful ignorance regarding power structures, why would I do so online? Dick-riders will forgive some heinous shit all in the name of some dude's record status. That is really not my life. I hit a wall, then came back and hit the same wall again. This is the pov from here.
New site looks amazing, new energy may or may not be in its future.
But do bans really work? It's very easy to go around them. And I'm pretty sure over the past number of years the people that come here on some bullshit are the same couple of people. Just going around the initial bans.
And they strictly do it to fuck with people and it obviously works... Anyone that leaves the board over what some dickhead wrote, I'm guessing deep at the heart of it is leaving for other reasons. The troll is just the straw that breaks the camels back.
It's slightly depressing to see people get run off the board. There have been many many great posters. But I also remember when some mods banned a few people and it pissed off a bunch of people.
But in the last few years, if I honestly thought that banning certain posters would keep the great posters here, I would say ban every last one of them. But I'm not sure it would...
I just wish some would stop engaging bullshit that doesn't offer anything of real value to the conversation when it's on a subject like the OG post. Every time I read someones reply post that I completely agree with, I wish I could just say "Could you fucking not reply", because it only adds to the trolls excitement that they are pulling them down to their level.
It's like trying to win an argument on a youtube video. Someone is looking for attention or a reaction and they win every time they are engaged.
I've never been a fan of bans. I didn't think they were necessary when there were a lot more music-minded posters and there were more perspectives and opinions across the board, be it about music, shoes or presidential elections. The music talk would dominate and the place would self-regulate. That is not the case anymore. Maybe a clean slate reset brought about by no political posts is necessary, I don't know. Is traffic more important than content? That's for Raj to decide.
I think the type of drop-bys we get says a lot. I also don't think there is that much difference in opinions being expressed by new trolls and some old posters; the main difference being status and music-related contributions...though with the latter, even that is questionable in some cases.
DOR said:
deep at the heart of it is leaving for other reasons.
A lot of former contributors have said as much - life, schedules, new families, etc.
Some present posters, like myself, can't stomach the predominant opinions being expressed with no vibrant music talk to balance it out. In my real life I don't keep company with rape apologists, people who support murdering civilians or willful ignorance regarding power structures, why would I do so online? Dick-riders will forgive some heinous shit all in the name of some dude's record status. That is really not my life. I hit a wall, then came back and hit the same wall again. This the pov from here.
New site looks amazing, new energy may or may not be in its future.
Personally I think the world has gone downhill since you stopped posting records and shoes photos.
i have no shoe game, (i rock old school pumas or whatever), so i had no idea the the shoe-rage that schetchers can provoke. got a hand me down pair for my one year old. the anger/disappointment/exasperation that was showered on me by the world was too much to take. now my daughter just wears em at home. they light up and stuff, seemed cool to me.
I miss having you around here too Bassie. But I totally understand why you don't come back often. Hope you keep feeling the urge to check back in though. Cheers to you and yours this holiday season.
In all honesty I'm not bothered by ridiculous political talk as long as it doesn't spill over into other threads. The e-beef some posters have with each other is tiresome. For the record, I would have no problem if this place were moderated a bit more. But finding someone to do it fairly and consistently is the hard part. Nobody wants to have to have that job.
di·ver·si·ty (d-vûrs-t, d-)
a. The fact or quality of being diverse; difference.
b. A point or respect in which things differ
tol·er·ance/ˈtäl(ə)rəns/
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.
I guess the point is that people should just shut up and accept it when cops gun down unarmed people, no matter how many times it happens.
If I ever get that tolerant someone just put a pillow over my face.
I could be wrong here, but I believe he was just suggesting that Dickwidth get the banhammer. C.H.I.L.L.
In the hope of diverting Dickbreath's attention away from the board I donate the new portable PigAnus™ sex toy especially designed for cop groupies and other passionate and designated pig lovers. The PigAnus™ is hand tailored and fits all sizes, it is easy to clean and extremely sturdy. I expect this to be a source of joy and pleasure to fill his pastime for years to come.
di·ver·si·ty (d-vûrs-t, d-)
a. The fact or quality of being diverse; difference.
b. A point or respect in which things differ
tol·er·ance/ˈtäl(ə)rəns/
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.
I guess the point is that people should just shut up and accept it when cops gun down unarmed people, no matter how many times it happens.
If I ever get that tolerant someone just put a pillow over my face.
I could be wrong here, but I believe he was just suggesting that Dickwidth get the banhammer. C.H.I.L.L.
I didn't see it that way, but maybe so.
yeah, i could totally be wrong too. i tried to get inside the mind of the Rock there.
Comments
The facts as well as the grand jury instructions are all in dispute but it generally agreed that there was some sort of scuffle between Brown and Wilson. The officer having never fired his gun is irrelevant. People with no prior history go into a rage and kill people all the time. The problem is cops unloading entire clips of ammo into people on an all too regular basis. They just shot a 12 year old kid with in 2 seconds of arriving on a scene of the kid sitting by himself at a park bench with an air soft gun. Once Brown fled from the car, Wilson could have stayed in the car and waited for the back up he had already called and which showed up right after Wilson shot Brown. Wilson made a decision to get out of the car and put himself in a situation where he felt he had to kill someone to survive. Wilson even said he felt like he was wrestling with the "Hulk" in the car. All the more reason to wait for back up and get out the taserers. Not jump out of the car and start shooting. Oh, and you can barely see any injuries on Wilson in the pictures so he's appears to be over exaggerating the veracity of the attack to justify a killing. Brown would have to be charging the officer with a weapon to justify "taking him down".
Isn't this one of the details?
You didn't deny being a scared, rightwing racist. A rare moment of honesty.
Seriously, what music do you listen to, and why are you here?
di·ver·si·ty (d-vûrs-t, d-)
a. The fact or quality of being diverse; difference.
b. A point or respect in which things differ
tol·er·ance/ˈtäl(ə)rəns/
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.
one of the worst threads in a minute and that's saying something given the overall declining quality of posts here.
can we get back to talking about music and records?
Soul Zilla I want you to know I read your whole post. I appreciated the thought you have given this and the time you put into your post.
You make one common historical error that I think it is important to correct.
Martin Luther King never preached civil rights in civil court.
King preached the opposite, civil rights in the streets.
In 1956, when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat, she knew that NAACP was looking for a case to take to court to dispute Montgomery's segregated bus laws. She did not know about MLK, a young preacher who had just moved to town, and his views on non-violent confrontation. The NAACP was a long established organization that looked to use the courts to correct injustice. MLK believed the courts were too slow and too prejudiced. He believed in direct confrontation. Thus he started the Montgomery Bus Boycott, he continued his non-violent confrontational tactics with marches from Selma to Chicago. His organization, the Southern Christian Leadership Council, organized protests, not court cases.
I feel like I've answered tall of this already, but maybe that was in another forum.
Wilson didn't "decide" to do anything in a rational sense. He panicked. For some reason he felt so physically overmatched by Brown that he shot at him 12 times out of pure blind fear.
I do believe Brown had his hands up as he turned around to face his killer. You have to tell me why you think 15 or so witnesses were lying about that, and why you dismiss the video of the construction workers, in real time, watching the killing. It seems to me that accepting Wilson's version of events completely is the real odd choice.
By the way, your use of "putting him down" makes me think you're as much of an asshole as Dickwidth is. What's that about?
I guess the point is that people should just shut up and accept it when cops gun down unarmed people, no matter how many times it happens.
If I ever get that tolerant someone just put a pillow over my face.
Is someone holding you two at gunpoint and refusing to let you start the kind of threads you claim you want?
Because that would be terrible.
I could be wrong here, but I believe he was just suggesting that Dickwidth get the banhammer. C.H.I.L.L.
I could be wrong, but I thought it could've been in reference to my judgmental poast, of which I can only say that I was just giving the troll what he wanted. Apologies, note-to-self not to feed.
This post is exactly why it even has to be spelled out that black lives matter. Never mind that the notion of diversity and tolerance are false premises to base justification for shooting a teenager six times - all while he was in a state of surrender or collapse - but that his life was some sort of abstraction, a matter of opinion whether or not he should have been allowed to live.
People are twisting every last bit of logic and history and using every selective piece of bullshit to excuse Wilson while Brown never got an iota of the same breathing room for a possible bad decision to JAY WALK.
People waited patiently from August for justice to be done. The reaction to the grand jury decision - which has been exaggerated and lied about as predominantly violent and used as deflection from the real issues - is actually measured given the circumstances. Expecting people to be told that they don't matter, that their children don't matter, their rights and their freedoms and safety and lives don't matter, and to just nod and take it...that is just another way to dehumanise them. Exactly how much are people supposed to take?
The capacity for empathy for Wilson is limitless and sports-related and frat riots are laughed off, but people are supposed to quietly turn away from another modern day lynching?
It's admirable you all can put this aside and share a drink. I can't even convince myself that I even want to talk about music on this board anymore.
Make that two people who read the original post from the original poster the same way. It doesn't change anything I wrote, just the attribution if I misread it.
And C.H.I.L.L. doesn't change shit.
This thread has been chock full of :nagl:
I really hope you endure this and stay. The Strut would be less without you and your voice.
As for the folks who are turning this into some political talking point or some absurd abstraction, shame on you. Shame. Here is some fucking truth for you...
But I'm here now and it's still a real dope site.
/thread jack.
Hey now, Laz is free to express himself just like everyone else.
Not for nothing. But do bans really work? It's very easy to go around them. And I'm pretty sure over the past number of years the people that come here on some bullshit are the same couple of people. Just going around the initial bans.
And they strictly do it to fuck with people and it obviously works... Anyone that leaves the board over what some dickhead wrote, I'm guessing deep at the heart of it is leaving for other reasons. The troll is just the straw that breaks the camels back.
It's slightly depressing to see people get run off the board. There have been many many great posters. But I also remember when some mods banned a few people and it pissed off a bunch of people.
But in the last few years, if I honestly thought that banning certain posters would keep the great posters here, I would say ban every last one of them. But I'm not sure it would...
I just wish some would stop engaging bullshit that doesn't offer anything of real value to the conversation when it's on a subject like the OG post. Every time I read someones reply post that I completely agree with, I wish I could just say "Could you fucking not reply", because it only adds to the trolls excitement that they are pulling them down to their level.
It's like trying to win an argument on a youtube video. Someone is looking for attention or a reaction and they win every time they are engaged.
these trolls are ruining the conversation.
this is no "free speech" issue.
I've never been a fan of bans. I didn't think they were necessary when there were a lot more music-minded posters and there were more perspectives and opinions across the board, be it about music, shoes or presidential elections. The music talk would dominate and the place would self-regulate. That is not the case anymore. Maybe a clean slate reset brought about by no political posts is necessary, I don't know. Is traffic more important than content? That's for Raj to decide.
I think the type of drop-bys we get says a lot. I also don't think there is that much difference in opinions being expressed by new trolls and some old posters; the main difference being status and music-related contributions...though with the latter, even that is questionable in some cases.
A lot of former contributors have said as much - life, schedules, new families, etc.
Some present posters, like myself, can't stomach the predominant opinions being expressed with no vibrant music talk to balance it out. In my real life I don't keep company with rape apologists, people who support murdering civilians or willful ignorance regarding power structures, why would I do so online? Dick-riders will forgive some heinous shit all in the name of some dude's record status. That is really not my life. I hit a wall, then came back and hit the same wall again. This is the pov from here.
New site looks amazing, new energy may or may not be in its future.
Personally I think the world has gone downhill since you stopped posting records and shoes photos.
In all honesty I'm not bothered by ridiculous political talk as long as it doesn't spill over into other threads. The e-beef some posters have with each other is tiresome. For the record, I would have no problem if this place were moderated a bit more. But finding someone to do it fairly and consistently is the hard part. Nobody wants to have to have that job.
I didn't see it that way, but maybe so.
Do what comes naturally!
yeah, i could totally be wrong too. i tried to get inside the mind of the Rock there.
I'm pretty sure this dude is Charles Barkley irl