eurobabeforum.com

I don't think that this verdict has anything to do with upholding justice or applying the law fairly.

The police demand the freedom to use violence for self-defence, even under nebulous circumstances. It is considered an acceptable risk that every now and then an innocent citizen is killed by their actions. The judiciary can not afford to lose good relations with the police. Had the judge sentenced the cops, he would have been seen as a traitor and his career might have suffered adverse effects.

other than the location of the news article (a strip club at 4am, where undercover cops were investigating drugs and prostitution activity, and where a brawl started), there is nothing remotely interesting IMHO in your post.

Go demonstrate in the streets with sharpton and the hippies. You're entitled. But you're not entitled to judge who is innocent, who is guilty and so on. There is a process, this is called a trial, like it or not, and imperfect as it is, it's better than some bar conversation or porn forum opinion.

You're funny, with your obsession to "raise the level".
who do you think you are?

Do you dispute that in the USA there is police brutality against blacks and latinos and that this is considered acceptable by the (white) society and the authorities?

Actually, Black American hate is tolerated. For every "hate crime" against black Americans, black Americans do 3 against whites, mexicans, other hispanics, native Americans and asians. If one goes by the groups they attack, black Americans appear to hate everyone else.

Black Americans blame everyone else for the problems black Americans face: The breakup of the family, 80% of black children born out of wedlock, HIV infection rates of almost 50% in the U.S., same number of crimes committed as whites, despite the 1/4 the population and so on. All sorts of anti-social behavior. This is completely self-inflicted, but it's tolerated because other Americans don't want to be called "racist."

As for the "unarmed" man who was shot, perhaps he should have dropped his weapon and surrendered. If there was a hint of false arrest, he could have sued the heck out of the officers. Instead, he kept trying to kill them and kept getting shot. With the peashooter 9mms that most cops now have, it may take a dozen shots just to stop someone. If they are on meth, they sometimes keep going, even with twenty or thirty rounds in them. The man simply wouldn't stop.

Many more whites are killed this way than other groups. One doesn't see the screaming of racism. When one threatens an officer with a weapon (generally the result of drugs), the person is justifiably shot. It's only when a black man is killed this way that its suddenly a racist matter.

But that is not what people want to believe, so it must not be true...

Billbo wrote:As for the "unarmed" man who was shot, perhaps he should have dropped his weapon and surrendered. If there was a hint of false arrest, he could have sued the heck out of the officers. Instead, he kept trying to kill them and kept getting shot.

Exactly of which event are you talkin about ??

The press coverages of this particular case discussed here all confirmed that the man was unarmed...

And it was also officially reported in the police acts that no guns has been found near him or any of his friends...

Xenomorgue wrote:Do you dispute that in the USA there is police brutality against blacks and latinos and that this is considered acceptable by the (white) society and the authorities?

yes. and it is acceptable because, like it or not, blacks and latinos make up the big numbers in crime stats.
and i also agree with bilbo.
police brutality against blacks and latinos are just because they just happen to be the majority of the troublemakers/criminals. call me a racist anytime you want, it's just like that. look up the statistics, or better, spend some time in jail in the US and come back with a new theory, a dilated anus, and a less narrow view of the world.