L410Turbolet wrote:

He intentionally plowed into a crowd of people, killing five, injuring dozens others, but it's his PHOTO that makes him "look bad"...

stl07 wrote:

I'm getting really annoyed with the response of this when all I am trying to do is gather information. I watched Ben Shapiro and he was having a field day about him being black and rapping about not liking Trump. Funny enough the Rittenhouse video made no mention about him being white and looking like a school shooter. I want to figure out why the hell this happened rather than debating over him looking like a criminal or assuming he is bad because he is a rapper

stl07 wrote:

I'm getting really annoyed with the response of this when all I am trying to do is gather information. I watched Ben Shapiro and he was having a field day about him being black and rapping about not liking Trump. Funny enough the Rittenhouse video made no mention about him being white and looking like a school shooter. I want to figure out why the hell this happened rather than debating over him looking like a criminal or assuming he is bad because he is a rapper

johns624 wrote:

stl07 wrote:

I'm getting really annoyed with the response of this when all I am trying to do is gather information. I watched Ben Shapiro and he was having a field day about him being black and rapping about not liking Trump. Funny enough the Rittenhouse video made no mention about him being white and looking like a school shooter. I want to figure out why the hell this happened rather than debating over him looking like a criminal or assuming he is bad because he is a rapper

What information are you trying to gather? It's in the news. He got in a domestic confrontation with a knife, fled in his vehicle, and drove through a parade, killing 6 people and injuring 50+ more. It was random and he appears to have no regard for other human life.

According to the criminal complaint, witnesses told police that the vehicle “appeared to be intentionally moving side to side,” with no attempt to slow down or stop as it struck multiple people and sent bodies and objects flying.

Brooks ignored several attempts to stop him, according to the criminal complaint.

A detective — wearing police insignia and a neon orange safety vest — stepped in front of Brooks’ vehicle and pounded on the hood, shouting “Stop,” several times but Brooks drove past him, according to the complaint.

A uniformed police officer who saw Brooks’ SUV traveling toward the parade route also tried to get his attention, yelling “Stop, stop the vehicle” several times but was ignored, according to the complaint. The officer “observed the driver looking straight ahead, directly at him, and it appeared he had no emotion on his face,” the complaint said.

Brooks braked at one point, but instead of turning away from the parade route, he turned into the crowd and appeared to rapidly accelerate, the complaint said.

meecrob wrote:

So wait...I heard that this guy had comitted a crime and was fleeing the scene. In the ensuing police chase he drove through the barriers for the parade and...well we know what happened. Has this been disproven?

stratosphere wrote:

meecrob wrote:

So wait...I heard that this guy had comitted a crime and was fleeing the scene. In the ensuing police chase he drove through the barriers for the parade and...well we know what happened. Has this been disproven?

I had thought that at first as well. Police and media have reported it was intentional. If that is the case it won't be manslaughter it will be 6 counts of first degree murder. They need to throw him under the jail. Too bad Wisconsin doesn't have a death penalty seems like a perfect case for one.

ltbewr wrote:

Brooks will end up in jail for the rest of his life upon conviction at trial or a plea deal for his manslaughter of what is now 6 persons and attempted manslaughter for many others. He is being held under an amount of bail and social pressure on prosecutors and the courts that will make it impossible to be released from jail before trial.

I wonder if Brooks, seeing how he was facing a likely return to jail from the alleged violent domestic confrontation that apparently happened before his violent act made the perverse decision to drive onto the parade route as one social defying, unforgivable, 'blaze of glory' act, perhaps to die at the hand of the cops.

johns624 wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

Brooks will end up in jail for the rest of his life upon conviction at trial or a plea deal for his manslaughter of what is now 6 persons and attempted manslaughter for many others. He is being held under an amount of bail and social pressure on prosecutors and the courts that will make it impossible to be released from jail before trial.

I wonder if Brooks, seeing how he was facing a likely return to jail from the alleged violent domestic confrontation that apparently happened before his violent act made the perverse decision to drive onto the parade route as one social defying, unforgivable, 'blaze of glory' act, perhaps to die at the hand of the cops.

Where do you get "manslaughter" from. This was murder, all the way.

LCDFlight wrote:

Sounds like terrorism.

stratosphere wrote:

seb146 wrote:

PixelPilot wrote:

I'm just going to highlight this and leave it here for people to see what is your stance and view of people driving their cars through crowds of kids and their parents.

Actually, I was pointing out that when it is a minority accused of committing a crime, the media finds the worst possible picture of the accused but when it is a scared white boy, they find the most wholesome. Nice try, though...

Really ??? Like the picture of Michael Brown in Ferguson MO in his HS graduation picture instead of the thug he really was?. Or Travon Martin innocent picture of when he was like what 13 instead of his Facebook pictures of him waving guns giving the finger and a mouth full of gold teeth? No I know in your world only one side does these things and it's not your side.

ltbewr wrote:

Brooks will end up in jail for the rest of his life upon conviction at trial or a plea deal for his manslaughter of what is now 6 persons and attempted manslaughter for many others. He is being held under an amount of bail and social pressure on prosecutors and the courts that will make it impossible to be released from jail before trial.

I wonder if Brooks, seeing how he was facing a likely return to jail from the alleged violent domestic confrontation that apparently happened before his violent act made the perverse decision to drive onto the parade route as one social defying, unforgivable, 'blaze of glory' act, perhaps to die at the hand of the cops.

Aaron747 wrote:

I would advise folks like him: "You stop learning when you begin every conversation from a place of politics. You start learning when you begin every conversation from a place of empathy."

Elkadad313 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

I would advise folks like him: "You stop learning when you begin every conversation from a place of politics. You start learning when you begin every conversation from a place of empathy."

So, this should have been the case re: Nick Sandmann and MSNBC, CNN, et al, right?

stratosphere wrote:

Elkadad313 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

I would advise folks like him: "You stop learning when you begin every conversation from a place of politics. You start learning when you begin every conversation from a place of empathy."

So, this should have been the case re: Nick Sandmann and MSNBC, CNN, et al, right?

Liberals only view things thru one lens. They don't see the bias of CNN and MSNBC ill say even FOX but at least FOX will try to show other viewpoints where the other two pretty much won't

Elkadad313 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

I would advise folks like him: "You stop learning when you begin every conversation from a place of politics. You start learning when you begin every conversation from a place of empathy."

So, this should have been the case re: Nick Sandmann and MSNBC, CNN, et al, right?

Aaron747 wrote:

Elkadad313 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

I would advise folks like him: "You stop learning when you begin every conversation from a place of politics. You start learning when you begin every conversation from a place of empathy."

So, this should have been the case re: Nick Sandmann and MSNBC, CNN, et al, right?

Sandmann didn’t exercise empathy either. Irresponsible reporting does not excuse his behavior.

Elkadad313 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Elkadad313 wrote:

So, this should have been the case re: Nick Sandmann and MSNBC, CNN, et al, right?

Sandmann didn’t exercise empathy either. Irresponsible reporting does not excuse his behavior.

Sandmann didn't begin 'the conversation.' He and his group were waiting for a bus and were being targeted with racist taunts from the Black Hebrew Israelites. Phillips then got in his face while beating his drum (i.e., he was the aggressor). What empathy was the kid supposed to have/show? If you had been in Sandmann's place, how would you have handled it?

Many bought into CNN's/MSNBC's instant (and incorrect) analysis, for which they paid big $$$ to settle. If it's leftist media, it is regarded as irresponsible reporting. The other way around, not so much.

Aaron747 wrote:

Elkadad313 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Sandmann didn’t exercise empathy either. Irresponsible reporting does not excuse his behavior.

Sandmann didn't begin 'the conversation.' He and his group were waiting for a bus and were being targeted with racist taunts from the Black Hebrew Israelites. Phillips then got in his face while beating his drum (i.e., he was the aggressor). What empathy was the kid supposed to have/show? If you had been in Sandmann's place, how would you have handled it?

Many bought into CNN's/MSNBC's instant (and incorrect) analysis, for which they paid big $$$ to settle. If it's leftist media, it is regarded as irresponsible reporting. The other way around, not so much.

Irresponsible reporting is what it is, regardless of which side - reporters do jump to conclusions on occasion, and producers/editors are supposed to be the gatekeepers - when they fail, yeah, the company ends up having to pay. That's not the same thing as the regular misinformation factory that is opinion hosts like Reid/Maddow/Carlson/Hannity who are not journalists, just propagandists. But they still have bosses, unlike total BS like TPUSA or Alex Jones.

As for your question, nobody describes a chanting native American senior citizen trying to defuse a racial altercation between two groups of people as an 'aggressor'. This thread is not about that event, but were I there, I would have asked him what the chant meant, as I have done many times traveling through AZ and NM.

ltbewr wrote:

Brooks will end up in jail for the rest of his life upon conviction at trial or a plea deal for his manslaughter of what is now 6 persons and attempted manslaughter for many others. He is being held under an amount of bail and social pressure on prosecutors and the courts that will make it impossible to be released from jail before trial.

I wonder if Brooks, seeing how he was facing a likely return to jail from the alleged violent domestic confrontation that apparently happened before his violent act made the perverse decision to drive onto the parade route as one social defying, unforgivable, 'blaze of glory' act, perhaps to die at the hand of the cops.

LCDFlight wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

Brooks will end up in jail for the rest of his life upon conviction at trial or a plea deal for his manslaughter of what is now 6 persons and attempted manslaughter for many others. He is being held under an amount of bail and social pressure on prosecutors and the courts that will make it impossible to be released from jail before trial.

I wonder if Brooks, seeing how he was facing a likely return to jail from the alleged violent domestic confrontation that apparently happened before his violent act made the perverse decision to drive onto the parade route as one social defying, unforgivable, 'blaze of glory' act, perhaps to die at the hand of the cops.

That brings up a couple of learnings from this incident. First, Mr Brooks’ class of offender, repeat violent felon, likely should have been permanently jailed years ago. He had no role in society. Second, there were armed people present who could have, and probably should have, lawfully shot Mr. Brooks to stop his attack. This is exactly why police have guns in the first place. Guns have ethical and appropriate uses.

We do have tools to prevent a habitual felon from killing a bunch of people and then going merrily on his way. When we do not use those tools, we have chaos.

Aaron747 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

Brooks will end up in jail for the rest of his life upon conviction at trial or a plea deal for his manslaughter of what is now 6 persons and attempted manslaughter for many others. He is being held under an amount of bail and social pressure on prosecutors and the courts that will make it impossible to be released from jail before trial.
I wonder if Brooks, seeing how he was facing a likely return to jail from the alleged violent domestic confrontation that apparently happened before his violent act made the perverse decision to drive onto the parade route as one social defying, unforgivable, 'blaze of glory' act, perhaps to die at the hand of the cops.

That brings up a couple of learnings from this incident. First, Mr Brooks’ class of offender, repeat violent felon, likely should have been permanently jailed years ago. He had no role in society. Second, there were armed people present who could have, and probably should have, lawfully shot Mr. Brooks to stop his attack. This is exactly why police have guns in the first place. Guns have ethical and appropriate uses.
We do have tools to prevent a habitual felon from killing a bunch of people and then going merrily on his way. When we do not use those tools, we have chaos.

Not sure that's an example of a law enforcement best practice - firing at a moving target at a fast-developing scene where many children are present? Just a tad risky, no?

ltbewr wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

That brings up a couple of learnings from this incident. First, Mr Brooks’ class of offender, repeat violent felon, likely should have been permanently jailed years ago. He had no role in society. Second, there were armed people present who could have, and probably should have, lawfully shot Mr. Brooks to stop his attack. This is exactly why police have guns in the first place. Guns have ethical and appropriate uses.
We do have tools to prevent a habitual felon from killing a bunch of people and then going merrily on his way. When we do not use those tools, we have chaos.

Not sure that's an example of a law enforcement best practice - firing at a moving target at a fast-developing scene where many children are present? Just a tad risky, no?

I recall early reports that at least one shot was fired at the vehicle by a police officer but that may have been incorrect. It would have been very dangerous for a police officer to use a gun to try to stop the driver as too many innocents in the background who could have been injured or killed.

johns624 wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Not sure that's an example of a law enforcement best practice - firing at a moving target at a fast-developing scene where many children are present? Just a tad risky, no?

I recall early reports that at least one shot was fired at the vehicle by a police officer but that may have been incorrect. It would have been very dangerous for a police officer to use a gun to try to stop the driver as too many innocents in the background who could have been injured or killed.

It depends on the background of the direction that the shot(s) were taken.

Aaron747 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

Brooks will end up in jail for the rest of his life upon conviction at trial or a plea deal for his manslaughter of what is now 6 persons and attempted manslaughter for many others. He is being held under an amount of bail and social pressure on prosecutors and the courts that will make it impossible to be released from jail before trial.

I wonder if Brooks, seeing how he was facing a likely return to jail from the alleged violent domestic confrontation that apparently happened before his violent act made the perverse decision to drive onto the parade route as one social defying, unforgivable, 'blaze of glory' act, perhaps to die at the hand of the cops.

That brings up a couple of learnings from this incident. First, Mr Brooks’ class of offender, repeat violent felon, likely should have been permanently jailed years ago. He had no role in society. Second, there were armed people present who could have, and probably should have, lawfully shot Mr. Brooks to stop his attack. This is exactly why police have guns in the first place. Guns have ethical and appropriate uses.

We do have tools to prevent a habitual felon from killing a bunch of people and then going merrily on his way. When we do not use those tools, we have chaos.

Not sure that's an example of a law enforcement best practice - firing at a moving target at a fast-developing scene where many children are present? Just a tad risky, no?

ItnStln wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

Sounds like terrorism.

Indeed

Kiwirob wrote:

seb146 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

If some people can't handle the facts of the case that is one thing but this wasn't put out to fuel anything. I don't get why an acquittal of a white on white crime case would stoke racial tensions. Unless you are using it for an agenda.

So why didn't the media find a picture of him in a suit? Why is the first picture of him making him look like a monster. It's not like he marched toward a crowd with a loaded gun and opened fire because he felt some kind of way from his house 20 miles away....

In my book anyone who drives through a crowd killing 5 and injuring 40 is a monster.

LCDFlight wrote:

All violent men and boys should be in jail at all times imo.

meecrob wrote:

Locking people up isn't going to make them "see the light"

meecrob wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

All violent men and boys should be in jail at all times imo.

What made them violent? Maybe we should focus on that perhaps? Locking people up isn't going to make them "see the light", in fact I believe there are tons of studies that prove that if you turn a man into an animal, they act like an animal.

Human society will be judged not on how high it can grow, but on how much we are willing to bring up the bottom percentage of people out of poverty etc. You can just say lock all the fucks up, now what happens when they decide you are a "fuck"?

Aaron747 wrote:

meecrob wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

All violent men and boys should be in jail at all times imo.

What made them violent? Maybe we should focus on that perhaps? Locking people up isn't going to make them "see the light", in fact I believe there are tons of studies that prove that if you turn a man into an animal, they act like an animal.

Human society will be judged not on how high it can grow, but on how much we are willing to bring up the bottom percentage of people out of poverty etc. You can just say lock all the fucks up, now what happens when they decide you are a "fuck"?

There is certainly a lot that can be done on prevention - addressing poverty, support for struggling/broken families, strengthening of community measures. But there are some folks, like the Bundys, Gacys, Kaczynskis, and Malvos who just can't be reached. They need to be locked up, it's the only way.

Kiwirob wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

meecrob wrote:

What made them violent? Maybe we should focus on that perhaps? Locking people up isn't going to make them "see the light", in fact I believe there are tons of studies that prove that if you turn a man into an animal, they act like an animal.

Human society will be judged not on how high it can grow, but on how much we are willing to bring up the bottom percentage of people out of poverty etc. You can just say lock all the fucks up, now what happens when they decide you are a "fuck"?

There is certainly a lot that can be done on prevention - addressing poverty, support for struggling/broken families, strengthening of community measures. But there are some folks, like the Bundys, Gacys, Kaczynskis, and Malvos who just can't be reached. They need to be locked up, it's the only way.

Those kinds of people need to be executed.

Aaron747 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

There is certainly a lot that can be done on prevention - addressing poverty, support for struggling/broken families, strengthening of community measures. But there are some folks, like the Bundys, Gacys, Kaczynskis, and Malvos who just can't be reached. They need to be locked up, it's the only way.

Those kinds of people need to be executed.

Eventually, but first they need to be studied. Ted Bundy's brain revealed nothing when physically examined, but it would have been useful to have MRI studies of his brain's response to stimuli.

Aaron747 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

There is certainly a lot that can be done on prevention - addressing poverty, support for struggling/broken families, strengthening of community measures. But there are some folks, like the Bundys, Gacys, Kaczynskis, and Malvos who just can't be reached. They need to be locked up, it's the only way.

Those kinds of people need to be executed.

Eventually, but first they need to be studied. Ted Bundy's brain revealed nothing when physically examined, but it would have been useful to have MRI studies of his brain's response to stimuli.

Aaron747 wrote:

meecrob wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

All violent men and boys should be in jail at all times imo.

What made them violent? Maybe we should focus on that perhaps? Locking people up isn't going to make them "see the light", in fact I believe there are tons of studies that prove that if you turn a man into an animal, they act like an animal.

Human society will be judged not on how high it can grow, but on how much we are willing to bring up the bottom percentage of people out of poverty etc. You can just say lock all the fucks up, now what happens when they decide you are a "fuck"?

There is certainly a lot that can be done on prevention - addressing poverty, support for struggling/broken families, strengthening of community measures. But there are some folks, like the Bundys, Gacys, Kaczynskis, and Malvos who just can't be reached. They need to be locked up, it's the only way.

singingamy wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

seb146 wrote:

So why didn't the media find a picture of him in a suit? Why is the first picture of him making him look like a monster. It's not like he marched toward a crowd with a loaded gun and opened fire because he felt some kind of way from his house 20 miles away....

In my book anyone who drives through a crowd killing 5 and injuring 40 is a monster.

We have a similar book I guess. Ask the family members of those 5 if he is the monster, I guess they will agree too. It is very and very sad that one guy who hardly messed up his own life takes away few other lives. My condolences to all the families

seb146 wrote:

singingamy wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

In my book anyone who drives through a crowd killing 5 and injuring 40 is a monster.

We have a similar book I guess. Ask the family members of those 5 if he is the monster, I guess they will agree too. It is very and very sad that one guy who hardly messed up his own life takes away few other lives. My condolences to all the families

That is how it should be. Unfortunately, America is not like that...

seb146 wrote:

PixelPilot wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Actually, I was pointing out that when it is a minority accused of committing a crime, the media finds the worst possible picture of the accused but when it is a scared white boy, they find the most wholesome. Nice try, though...

Nobody is accusing him of anything because they don't have to. There are videos that show what he did. There's no doubt here.
Nice try though.

And, again, when it is a minority, no matter the circumstance, the worst possible picture is shown. All the unarmed Black people that have been murdered by cops are shown by their mug shot or smoking weed or posing with guns. People talk about equality and treat all Americans equally, but when we actually do that, one side complains.

Aesma wrote:

The US is already putting way more people in jail than all other countries, it doesn't seem to be the right way to do it, looking at the results.

Aaron747 wrote:

stratosphere wrote:

Elkadad313 wrote:

So, this should have been the case re: Nick Sandmann and MSNBC, CNN, et al, right?

Liberals only view things thru one lens. They don't see the bias of CNN and MSNBC ill say even FOX but at least FOX will try to show other viewpoints where the other two pretty much won't

Equating CNN and MSNBC shows you have watched neither.

LCDFlight wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

stratosphere wrote:

Liberals only view things thru one lens. They don't see the bias of CNN and MSNBC ill say even FOX but at least FOX will try to show other viewpoints where the other two pretty much won't

Equating CNN and MSNBC shows you have watched neither.

Both CNN and MSNBC are hard left. MSNBC is harder, but this is really splitting hairs. Both are outside the mainstream. Exactly like Fox, imo. AllSides app agrees with me.

NIKV69 wrote:

Aesma wrote:

The US is already putting way more people in jail than all other countries, it doesn't seem to be the right way to do it, looking at the results.

I can give you a surefire way to not get in jail. Don't commit a crime.