It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Looks like the Left will be destroying St. Louis tonight

page: 18
31
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 01:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

originally posted by: RomeByFire

originally posted by: avgguy
Step1- burn down own city
Step2- complain that city is destroyed
Step3- beg for federal/state aid
Step4- burn down city
Repeat


Which cities have been burned down?

The last time was in 1666.




That's not true, in 1871 some animal set Chicago on fire, I herd it was over some bull $&@/.
🤓

Oops! My bad! I bet an Antifa member started it!



Maybe but I don't think they will ever take accowntability for that cowardly act.

Glad to see that you put the blame on them for their actions.



What else cud I say.


😂




posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 01:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: pirhanna
a reply to: carewemust

Yeah. Not that it burned down or anything but people did light buildings on fire.

I dont really have an opinion on the case itself. I dont know enough details to have one.


All I can recall off-hand is that the Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder, inserted himself into the equation somehow. It was White Ferguson police officer shooting a Black man to death. But I think Ferguson is a mostly Black suburb/neighborhood. The protestors were contained there, and allowed to conduct arson and vandalism freely.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 01:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
I just want to know;

In all the burning and tearing down and looting, why is it that bars, liquor stores, get torched and IRS offices never do?


I know you were saying that tongue and cheek but you are correct sir!!!

Government buildings. Offices, infrastructure depots, public transport, courts, jails and social service buildings are never marched on. They certainly have the numbers to keep their doors closed. This would provide impact. At the least perhaps one of the more intelligent protesters could speak for the mob and perhaps get a response from city/state/federal leadership.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 01:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: face23785

You seem to have a problem with what I said earlier.

I'm not outraged about anything. You seem to be more outraged with my opinion than I am of this case actually.

My point was that having a Judge, or anyone for that matter, declare something as a fact based off of nothing but their personal belief shouldn't be allowed in a criminal trial.

In this case, they just decided to make the Gun belong to one person when there was no actual evidence to support that. But DNA evidence was in fact linking the gun to the cop, who is trained not to get his DNA all over evidence in the first place.

Now, that doesn't mean for a fact that it's actually his either. Which is why it simply shouldn't be counted as evidence either way. The Cop, through his own mishandling of it tainted the evidence at best, but might have actually planted it. That is reasonable doubt and normally would have screwed up the whole case.


This was the point of my whole post earlier, actually, though you're coming at it from a completely different angle that I don't understand. To find the cop guilty, the prosecution would have had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the cop intended to murder the guy in cold blood, and by extension that the surrounding circumstances did not justify the shooting. It appears that there wasn't enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt which one of them the gun belonged to. Therefore, it left a reasonable possibility that the cop might not have set out to murder the guy in cold blood.

Reasonable doubt. Unless the prosecution could actually show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the cop planted the gun, it had to be assumed that he did not. That's how the criminal justice system works--the burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense.

Edit to add:

Which is why it simply shouldn't be counted as evidence either way.

But it IS evidence. And both sides, prosecution and defense, will put their own spin on it. It's then up to the people (jury) or person (judge) hearing the case to decide which, if either, side they believe.
edit on 16-9-2017 by riiver because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-9-2017 by riiver because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-9-2017 by riiver because: Forgot how to type, evidently...



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 01:27 AM
link   
Nvm.


edit on 16-9-2017 by riiver because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: riiver


to find someone guilty, the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty.


I'm not forgetting that at all... the cop shot and killed a man. He is guilty. That's the ultimate violation of a person's absolute natural and Constitutional right to life -- at the hands of government, with no due process or equal application of the law. There is no doubt at all that the cop killed him. The cop is guilty of taking a life. Period.

In accordance with the law, and due process, the cop should have been given any and every opportunity -- in a court of law -- to provide an affirmative defense, in which he can provide evidence to show lives were in danger, including his own. If he could successfully prove he was acting against a direct and imminent threat to his own life, his action would be deemed "justifiable." He would not be "not guilty," because a life was still taken. But it would be "justified."

The problem is that since the Garner vs. Tennessee decision by the Supreme Court, an officer only has to claim that he feared his life might be in danger... thus the so-called burden of proof is now placed on the authorities to prove that he did not fear that he might be in danger.

And that's an impossible task. Hence, the perception (if not the reality) that cops have a license to kill with impunity.
edit on 16-9-2017 by Boadicea because: formatting



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 07:49 AM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

If wishes were fishes, and fishes were wishes.......

AH hell just let em burn the place down, aint much good about that town anyway....too many lefties thinking leftie ways doing leftie things to non leftie people for the sake of being wetoddit.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 07:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: avgguy
Step1- burn down own city
Step2- complain that city is destroyed
Step3- beg for federal/state aid
Step4- burn down city
Repeat


This needs to be a Meme. But you forgot a step:

Step 5: Complain that the Riot Police were to Rough with the Snowflakes.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Well this thread came to a screeching halt. I take it StL wasn't destroyed by the left.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
Well this thread came to a screeching halt. I take it StL wasn't destroyed by the left.


it was on the internet



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

I checked google maps, its still there.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Apparently, for an angry crowd of this size, injuries on both sides were minimal.

In regard to the matter that touched off these protests, although the criminal case was discussed here rather extensively, apparently, the St. Louis Police department settled with Smith's family in a civil suit for wrongful death in 2013.



Stockley left the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department in August 2013. Later that year, the St. Louis police board settled a wrongful death suit with Smith's survivors for $900,000.


Yeah, I can understand why people in St. Louis are angry.

CNN
edit on 16-9-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Eldest808

"Looks like the Left will be destroying St. Louis tonight "

Curious why you think this is a left thing?

Only those on the "left" would be upset with the outcome of this trial?

Only those on the left would protest something?



GIVE THIS GUY A BREAK. THE CASE HAS BEEN IN THE COURTS FOR 6 YEARS. He was found innocent. Its a shame the Media made this guy Public Enemy #1 after being the dam Court System for 6 years.


He planted a gun and declared he was going to kill this MFer before they rammed his car to a stop and then immediately opened fire.

The DNA found on the gun found in the car had only the officers DNA on it.

The Officer was seen running back to his car and rummaging through a bag to find something right after the shooting.

His partner beside him never even felt the need to reach for his weapon.

It's on Camera.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Okay, I'll bite. The far left will be destroying St. Louis. And the far right is destroying the planet. I'm not sure which is worse, but I do know that either extreme position is bad for society; and arguing about these things and labeling people as such divides us farther. We need to come together. Right now. Over me. Over you. Over everyone.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: HassenBinSobar

So you condone violence and destruction as long as it's "lefties" who are the ones hurt or doing the damage?

Nice.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Actually I don't care either way as I am neither left or right....humans kill each other...its a fact. Let em kill each other, less I have to deal with. No sympathy for a creation run amok. Thats like me destroying my stereo and blaming you for telling me to turn it down.

And yes, sometimes violence is a necessity as we are not civilized beings. If we truly were we would not have riots, armies, police, most laws....etc etc. Personal Responsibility is like a magical unicorn now n days.

Most of what I understand and know has no real civilian applications anyway. I just don't care if society eats itself alive. I have nothing vested in societal woes created by superficial humans who want their cake and eat it too. This nation is caving in under the weight of its own selfish petty horse poo. I welcome history as it repeats a predictable cycle in which we have yet to learn the primary lesson.

Human kind has to experience strife at the deepest levels to realize their folly much in the way alcoholics have to hit rock bottom before they get sober. What your witnessing is human nature at its best. I suggest you get used to seeing that kind of thing as it will get worse as time goes on I guarantee.

Just being honest



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Don't you mean to say black people will destroy St Louis??



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328
Don't you mean to say black people will destroy St Louis??


They can't be that honest; that would sound too racist.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: tabularosa
Okay, I'll bite. The far left will be destroying St. Louis. And the far right is destroying the planet. I'm not sure which is worse, but I do know that either extreme position is bad for society; and arguing about these things and labeling people as such divides us farther. We need to come together. Right now. Over me. Over you. Over everyone.


How are the groups of angry citizens in St. Louis legitimately classified as "the left."

They are Black Americans angry at yet another episode of a White cop who killed a Black man getting exonerated under daily ridiculous circumstances.

Perhaps you aren't aware that the City of St. Louis settled a WRONGFUL DEATH suit with Smith's family for $900,000 back in 2013.

Come on. Stop with the simplistic partisan BS.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: HassenBinSobar

Your post seems to evidence a severe lack of the most basic empathic response.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join