America - The Official Thread

[TenEightyOne]

None of my facts have been disproven & as of now, I'm the only of the 3 who has actually provided evidence to back my posts up.

Wilson testifies he stopped Brown & told him to get out of the street. Wilson testifies that Brown pushed his door close when he tried to exit. Wilson testifies that Brown & he got into a scuffle that resulted in a shot being fired inside the vehicle because Brown went for the gun. Wilson testifies that Brown ran & he told him to stop with his weapon drawn (seeing as Brown just attempted to inflict harm). Wilson testifies that Brown turned around & charged, resulting in Wilson firing 6 shots in Brown.

The first eye witnesses instead claim that Wilson told Brown to stop & first fired 2 shots into his back. When Brown turned around, Wilson fired 4 more bullets into him with Brown's hands in the air. This is when the media reports that a cop killed an innocent black teenager & protests/riots start. Shortly after, the robbery video shows up showing Brown was not the gentle giant his mother said he was.

Then comes the autopsy that shows that Brown was never shot in the back. First lie by the original statements that the media reported on. The autopsy shows Brown was shot 4 times in the arm & exposes the 2nd lie that his hands were in the air. A cop will not randomly fire at someone's arms in the air, they fire for the center mass. This leads more credibility to Wilson's claim that Brown rushed him & the shots he fired hit Brown's arm first before the last 2.

The video I posted just released 2 days ago. The man filming is sympathetic with Brown. The conversation he picks up between 2 neighbors however, end up showing someone saying nearly exactly what Wilson reported; Brown was told to stop & then rushed at the officer. He thought the officer missed his shots when he fired the first shots into Brown's arm because Brown was still moving towards Wilson. This isn't some video that was filmed hours or a day later, it was filmed shortly after the incident & the men overheard in the video have no knowledge of what the community would endure following the shooting.

Okay, I'll say it again for you.

The policeman's testimony is suspect by default, it is neither unproven nor disproven. We know that, and there's no source to be had?

Dorian Johnson's testimony is suspect by default, it has already been disproven in part. We know that and have discussed the facts in enough detail that neither of us needs to provide citations, I'm sure.

The video you posted with no source and no idents, it might be genuine but there's no way of verifying the audio. We also don't know who's in it, the "witness" who speaks hasn't turned up in any articles about the video, as time goes on I find that more and more surprising. That video is neither proven nor disproven. It certainly could have been completed on another day.

The robbery video; noone from the store called the police, the police didn't know about the robbery.

So your sources aren't enough for you to make the seemingly-based claim that you are, you've profiled this guy as uneducated, from a background where the community are 100% criminal, and an idiot whose final moments before a gun were "Lol". You either have some other sources you're not sharing or you've pre-judged the case.

An armed police officer used deadly force to detain an unarmed civilian.

Your intention to ask in the way you worded it is to paint this as a cop just shooting a civilian without any reason. You won't get a further response from me.

No, I'm not citing dictionaries to help you understand that sentence. As a base, with no other words in that sentence (which means you can't use your own mysterious internal sources to re-imagine some non-existent meaning or detail) would you agree that was correct? Because I see it as literally true in itself.

 

[phillgt2002]

I don't know what side to believe now.

 

[McLaren]

The video you posted with no source and no idents, it might be genuine but there's no way of verifying the audio. We also don't know who's in it, the "witness" who speaks hasn't turned up in any articles about the video, as time goes on I find that more and more surprising. That video is neither proven nor disproven. It certainly could have been completed on another day.

This is as a big a stretch as the morons who claim Brown was shot repeatedly in the arm because he was protecting himself.

No articles? You mean besides the one the video I linked to is in & these?
http://clashdaily.com/2014/08/new-e...ting-states-brown-doubled-back-toward-police/
http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/17/unwitting-witness-pokes-holes-in-michael-brown-shooting-story/
http://buzzpo.com/breaking-news-new-witness-blows-huge-hole-michael-brown-case/

The video was filmed moments after the shooting & has only been reported in the last 24-48 hours.

The robbery video; noone from the store called the police, the police didn't know about the robbery.

No one called the police? Ok, what's this right here.

"That is when Brown reached across the counter and grabbed numerous packs of Swisher Sweets and turned to leave the store. [Blank Name] then calls "911".

Continued report.

Only Officer Wilson had no knowledge of the robbery.

So your sources aren't enough for you to make the seemingly-based claim that you are, you've profiled this guy as uneducated, from a background where the community are 100% criminal, and an idiot whose final moments before a gun were "Lol". You either have some other sources you're not sharing or you've pre-judged the case.

I've provided several sources now to your zero.

You're in no position to judge my sources when I just sat here & proved you wrong above claiming no one called the police. Since you got that and the claim there's no articles about my video wrong, what makes anything you say have any validity about being disproven or not, esp. since you haven't provided one source of your own to back that up?

No, I'm not citing dictionaries to help you understand that sentence. As a base, with no other words in that sentence (which means you can't use your own mysterious internal sources to re-imagine some non-existent meaning or detail) would you agree that was correct? Because I see it as literally true in itself.

You're intention is for me to answer that, "Yes, a cop killed an unarmed civilian" without any intention of including the answer as to why a cop killed an unarmed civilian.

 

[a6m5]

How big is that kid in the video? Either he's a giant, or the guy who tried to stop him was a really small person(but very brave).

Having seen a 5" British police officer incapacitate 4 large, very violent thugs until reinforcements arrived to support her I think US police officers sometimes rely too much on just pulling a firearm trigger.

Wouldn't that be like the highlight of the year? I'm not familiar with the evidence surrounding Ferguson shooting, and I also agree with your assumption regarding the police shooting in this country, but small female cop to take on four large & very violent thugs? I personally couldn't ask the police to make that level of sacrifice. She could have very easily ended up with serious permanent injury or two. I'm glad she's OK, but I'm not surprised at your example, I am absolutely shocked.

He's dead and none of those things, assuming they are true, are worthy of a death penalty. But that's OK because he's a criminal.

Again, I haven't really kept up with the case, so I apologize in advance if I've missed out on some key report, or evidence, but do we know that this was some kind of execution?

 

[McLaren]

How big is that kid in the video? Either he's a giant, or the guy who tried to stop him was a really small person(but very brave).

He reportedly was 6'4" & weighed 300lbs at only 18.

 

[zzz_pt]

 

[TenEightyOne]

Wouldn't that be like the highlight of the year? I'm not familiar with the evidence surrounding Ferguson shooting, and I also agree with your assumption regarding the police shooting in this country, but small female cop to take on four large & very violent thugs? I personally couldn't ask the police to make that level of sacrifice. She could have very easily ended up with serious permanent injury or two. I'm glad she's OK, but I'm not surprised at your example, I am absolutely shocked.

A case of doing what she had to, a combination of speed, taser, baton and gas all at once. There were more officers there within a couple of minutes but she'd been passing the scene on patrol. She could have been hurt but did the job the police train hard for. And without losing her hat, which takes some poise.

No articles? You mean besides the one the video I linked to is in & these?
http://clashdaily.com/2014/08/new-e...ting-states-brown-doubled-back-toward-police/
http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/17/unwitting-witness-pokes-holes-in-michael-brown-shooting-story/
http://buzzpo.com/breaking-news-new-witness-blows-huge-hole-michael-brown-case/

What I've said to you, and what I think @FoolKiller said too, is that the video pictures are no doubt real. Is the audio real? The circumstances seem a little suspicious, everywhere it appears it vanishes. Like in your Link #1.

Guess what, Link #2 is the same video. Originally found by "Conservative Treehouse", given your interest in these things you'll no doubt remember some of their Trayvon Martin "coverage", they link a profile that doesn't actually have the video.

Link #3, a rehash of CT's text (just like every other site that carried it) but... no video.

If this video really carries the voice of the eyewitness and if we really are on the internet, why isn't more being made of that? Does it strike you as odd that it took so long to surface? You're hanging your hat on that video so we can only wait and see.

CT guess that the video original (they have two recuts they've made) was removed by the uploader "at the behest of the surrounding black community who have a narrative to maintain". Wow, just wow.

No one called the police? Ok, what's this right here.

I didn't say no-one called the police, I said no-one from the store called the police, the store's attorney has been very clear about that. Presumably a member of the public telephoned the police, so who, and what's their witness statement?

I've provided several sources now to your zero.

You're in no position to judge my sources when I just sat here & proved you wrong above claiming no one called the police. Since you got that and the claim there's no articles about my video wrong, what makes anything you say have any validity about being disproven or not, esp. since you haven't provided one source of your own to back that up?

But I proved that right, and for you not to know that was right you haven't even listed to the store's statements in the last 24 hours. So now I've linked you, Mr. Research. Nobody from the store called the police.

Nor did I say there weren't any articles about the video (do you read this in English or in a translator? that's a genuine question). I said the original wasn't there. It isn't, only edits and reposts. @FoolKiller pointed that out to you to.

I wasn't sure what sources to provide when the source was your own rambling "Lol death!" post. You have apparently made your mind up, you instantly believe all evidence you see (or at least I gather that's true) but you're sure nobody else knows anything about it. Hmm.

You're in no position to judge my sources

Yes I am, you posted them to back up your argument. I saw it.

You're intention is for me to answer that, "Yes, a cop killed an unarmed civilian" without any intention of including the answer as to why a cop killed an unarmed civilian.

"Why" wasn't in the question and I never said "cop". Sigh again. Try reading the question and see if you can answer it. Using the words that are actually in it.

 

[FoolKiller]

Of course, if he'd used a taser it probably would have been used five or six times.

I wish I would stop being right.

then when he was given one last chance to stop, he rushed the officer.

What does "one last chance to stop" mean? What would have occurred if Brown kept running. To me last chance sounds like shots will be fired for anything other than laying on the ground.

Maybe you just worded that wrong and that isn't how Officer Wilson actually worded it.

I don't have sympathy for someone who put his life into such a situation when he could have easily complied by getting out of the street or giving up after running 35ft. away. He rushed an officer with his gun drawn, what did he think would happen?

35ft away? Definitely necessitates lethal force as the first option.

The cop drew his weapon the moment Brown reached for it, failed, and ran. Read what the Sheriff said; "the suspect tries to get the officer's gun, the officer has every right to use deadly force. If the suspect then tries to flee, they have attempted to shoot an officer (with the officer's gun) and would be treated no differently than any other fleeing felon."

Wilson would be within' his right to use lethal force at any case after Brown failed to get the gun b/c Brown intended to harm the officer in some form or another (why else do you reach for a cop's gun if not to use it against him?).

The way you make this out, it sounds like if all six shots went in Brown's back it would be justified. Is that your opinion? If so, it says a lot about how far this conversation can go.

Every outlet kept bringing this up in the beginning to show Brown was an innocent teenager shot in cold blood.

Fine. Save it for a discussion about the media coverage, not as a retort to people who never brought it up. No one here has tried to defend Brown's character or denied he appeared to have just committed a theft.

This is what Brown's friend testified.

Quoting a source you were happy to disprove?

Just as silly as it is to charge an officer with a gun drawn, an officer you just tried to attack by attempting to steal his weapon moments ago.

Something which only Wilson could be witness to. If he's lying, it wouldn't be the first time excessive force was used with false claims of assaulting an officer used as an excuse. It was inside the vehicle and the man whose actions are on question is the only one to claim this.

Look, fact is we don't really know what happened, no matter how much you think you do. This might be a justified shooting, I don't know. But when death is an outcome it is important to ask questions and look closely at everything. The local PD, who are the ones to be liable if this was improper, are the only investigation claiming to be concluded. The FBI still need to see the body for themselves, running their own autopsy, not using members of the local PD's team. Wait to see the FBI findings before claiming Michael Brown got what he had coming to him.

Speaking of autopsies:

The Brown Family autopsy has been completed. They claim it disagrees with the police autopsy. SHOCK!!!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...n-was-trying-to-surrender-when-he-was-killed/

The riots are not to be blamed on the police. The riots are to be blamed on a community full of people who learned nothing from the Martin case;

All about the overreaction and nothing to do with a long history of contention between the citizens and the police, right?

John Oliver summarized it and the nationwide police mentality that led to this situation pretty well: (Language Warning)


Note: police are using excessive force, not in riots, more commonly. This leads to the assumption that Wilson was no different. The situation in Ferguson, from not believing Wilson to the riots, is the result of a police mentality.

Then again, this is the same community that wrote "Snitches Get Stitches" on the store that Brown robbed.

One man = a community? By that rationale, combined with your definite assertion that Brown was justifiably killed, Wilson should have shot everyone in sight.

 

[Not_A_Guest]

Okay, I can tell from a single post that this whole thread is about what's going down in Ferguson. But I have a few questions to ask:
1 (the most important one): A white man can attract the hate of an entire country when he shoots a black man, but when blacks shoot other blacks (which happens in poor and urban communities) nobody gives a hoot. Why is that?
2: Why is everyone under the impression that white-on-black shootings only occur because of racism?
3: Is ANYONE entitled to make a solid point in this case? If there were any witnesses, they would have been found. No civilian outside of the forensics and ballistics labs can say anything regarding the truth of this matter. Yes, that includes politicians.

 

[Danoff]

Look, fact is we don't really know what happened, no matter how much you think you do. This might be a justified shooting, I don't know.

I maintain that cops should only fire when fired upon.

 

[FoolKiller]

1 (the most important one): A white man can attract the hate of an entire country when he shoots a black man, but when blacks shoot other blacks (which happens in poor and urban communities) nobody gives a hoot. Why is that?

Media.
30 people killed by 1 man is a crisis.
1,000 people die in a natural disaster is a tragedy.
100,000 people die and it just becomes a statistic.

Fact is, report on every gang shooting and people will stop listening. Try to discuss how to fix communities where it happens and you get attacked unless you blame it on the white man. Just ask Bill Cosby.

2: Why is everyone under the impression that white-on-black shootings only occur because of racism?

Everyone isn't. It wouldn't be a debate if they were. White cops kill black criminals all the time, but only the ones that seem unjust get full scale racism comments. No one here has leveled a racism comment in this situation.

3: Is ANYONE entitled to make a solid point in this case?

No, but police withheld information for days and that allowed wild speculation to occur.

EDIT:

I maintain that cops should only fire when fired upon.

I like to leave room for lethal force in general, or we could see stabbed or beaten cops.

 

[Not_A_Guest]

@FoolKiller So basically, nobody cares about all those gang shootings because media and politics. They need ratings, and democrats need votes.

Thanks for the enlightenment. It sure is a good thing that GTPlanet has one of the smartest collections of forums on the internet

 

[Danoff]

I like to leave room for lethal force in general, or we could see stabbed or beaten cops.

That's what tasers, night sticks, and police training are for. I don't even want cops to fire if someone is pointing a gun at them.

 

[TenEightyOne]

1 (the most important one): A white man can attract the hate of an entire country when he shoots a black man, but when blacks shoot other blacks (which happens in poor and urban communities) nobody gives a hoot. Why is that?

Arguably if two old white guys argue over a game of cards and one shoots the other... that sinks too. Life is cheap, news is about the most entertaining story. Or the story that's most malleable into entertainment. By "entertainment" I mean of course reader/viewer figures, and how they look to one's sponsors.

2: Why is everyone under the impression that white-on-black shootings only occur because of racism?

See the above answer, some of the most reported interracial shootings have seemed (or have been found) to have a racial motivation. The news like to put things in neat boxes and in the end some of the general public start thinking of the world the same way too.

3: Is ANYONE entitled to make a solid point in this case? If there were any witnesses, they would have been found. No civilian outside of the forensics and ballistics labs can say anything regarding the truth of this matter. Yes, that includes politicians.

The genuinely-proven witnesses, as you imply... apart from that no. So facts are clear in the wider scope (eg the 'militarisation' of street police, race relations) while other issues are hinted at in this case (crime and punishment, the right to protest, the power to declare protest illegal).

Beyond that all we know is that an incident which began with an officer approaching an unarmed civilian ended up with the civilian shot dead. Some genuine witnesses are now having their testimony partially disproved (what that means for the rest of their testimony is only opinion) while some other witnesses are turning out to be suspect.

We know there was a robbery beforehand... one wonders just how threatened the storekeeper was when he recounts how he tried to lock the two of them in the store. The store didn't phone the police either.

Here's a question that hasn't been answered; how well did the store staff know Brown and Johnson? Locking a robber in seems an odd thing to try to do. (Store lock-in description, first image in @McLaren's post). Perhaps they were well known to the store and without the police intervention all would have been resolved.

That's still not judging what happened, of course, as per your last question no-ones entitled to make a solid evidential point where there is no evidence or only evidence that's been disproven.

EDIT: Mostly tree'd by @FoolKiller

 

[Not_A_Guest]

That's what tasers, night sticks, and police training are for. I don't even want cops to fire if someone is pointing a gun at them.

It doesn't occur to you that such a concept might be a little dangerous for cops involved? I'm not trying to be edgy, I really do want to learn others' opinions.

 

[Danoff]

It doesn't occur to you that such a concept might be a little dangerous for cops involved? I'm not trying to be edgy, I really do want to learn others' opinions.

It does occur to me. But citizens don't actually want to shoot cops - even sometimes citizens who are pointing guns at cops (or who are actually pointing a garden hose at them but the cops thing it's a gun). People get scared. Sometimes cops are busting down your door invading your home - it's not always easy to tell whether it's the police or someone pretending to be the police.

Being a police officer is a dangerous profession. But they exist to protect us, not the other way around. I'm sick of reading about police officers who kill innocent people because they thought they might have been at risk.

Edit:

Also, when you're breaking down someone's door, don't just shoot dogs because they're dogs and you think they might defend. Maybe take a dog bite to the arm and suck it up - that's a beloved you're about to off unnecessarily.

 

[FoolKiller]

That's what tasers, night sticks, and police training are for. I don't even want cops to fire if someone is pointing a gun at them.

I believe just pointing a gun is not lethal force. It does not fall under my scope of justifiable.

When I say lethal force, I truly mean an act intended to kill an officer. A cop should always try non-lethal force first, but if it is ineffective or he is unable I won't blame him for shooting.

 

[McLaren]

Edit* deleted. It ain't worth coming home today and getting into this for the next 3 afternoons. You have your view of the story and I have mine.

That's the last from me on it until the verdict is given not that that will be enough for some.

 

[a6m5]

I'm kind of in the middle of this type politics. I've argued Danoff's point before, but I think the police reserve the right to fire first, if they need to. If the cop isn't sure if the guy is holding a garden hose, or .357 Magnum, I agree that cop should hold fire. After being ordered to drop the gun, if the police is 100% sure it's a firearm the suspect is about to point at him, I support his decision to drop the gunman. I do wholeheartedly agree on increased use of tasers. At the very least, try pepper spray & batons when they can afford to.

On the "character assassination" by the surveillance footage released by the police, I found it ironic. It seemed to me that was the same exact game they also wanted to play on the police.

On the shooting itself, I think most of bickering would be waste of time until more detail become available. Shooting could've been 100% justified or 100% criminal, but my guess, probably somewhere in between. We'll likely learn soon enough.

 

[Liquid]

Interesting that tasing has been brought up. I just came across this story of an 8 year old who was tasered by police when they seemingly could not disarm her when she was brandishing some sort of knife.

Now, it conveniently glosses over exactly why the police were called in the first place and why the girl was allegedly armed with some sort of knife, but tasing an 8 year old child to disarm her? Now that does strike me as excessive.

 

[FoolKiller]

Interesting that tasing has been brought up. I just came across this story of an 8 year old who was tasered by police when they seemingly could not disarm her when she was brandishing some sort of knife.

Now, it conveniently glosses over exactly why the police were called in the first place and why the girl was allegedly armed with some sort of knife, but tasing an 8 year old child to disarm her? Now that does strike me as excessive.

Did you see this one that I posted?

I wish I would stop being right.

Even non-lethal tools can be misused excessively. It goes back to the whole police mentality of acting like they're militarized bullies.

 

[Omnis]

He reportedly was 6'4" & weighed 300lbs at only 18.

That's why I'm an upstanding citizen. If you're big like that, people are automatically afraid of you-- that is, more likely to kill you if they feel threatened.

edit: It also doesn't help your cause to rob convenience stores, shove said store owner across the doorway, and break an officer's eye socket. This guy Mike Brown was a scumbag.

 

[TenEightyOne]

That's why I'm an upstanding citizen. If you're big like that, people are automatically afraid of you-- that is, more likely to kill you if they feel threatened.

edit: It also doesn't help your cause to rob convenience stores, shove said store owner across the doorway, and break an officer's eye socket. This guy Mike Brown was a scumbag.

I agree with you mostly, I'd stop short of "scumbag" but overall the tone is right.

That said, we're talking about two unarmed men being apprehended by a police officer (presuming that both were in his awareness). The officer used deadly force during the incident and Michael Brown was killed.

I saw the reports that said the officer suffered a minor fracture (not a break in the skull as some sites mis-reported from the DA statement ) in an area of the skull similar to where he fired the last bullet into Michael Brown's brain from a position with the gun above Brown's head.

That in itself needs to be investigated without favour; we know the likelihood of what the cop was like (that's not leading, I'm erring towards him being a good guy) and we've seen some evidence of what Brown was like (the shop owner tried to lock him in the store and was shoved out of the way so Brown could reopen it).

That doesn't alter the final outcome, the officer's conduct in this shooting needs to be examined carefully.

Quite possibly he did exactly what he had to do but it's very hard to say which facts are ultimately correct right now. Very interestingly a reporter tweeted that a "police source" tells her a "dozen" witnesses corroborate the officer testimony. True or not, that doesn't alter the fact that the use of deadly force needs to be investigated openly and properly.

 

[doblocruiser]

Haven't read the whole thread but I think this gentleman has a point

 

[TenEightyOne]

@doblocruiser, not all nasty Republicans are white you know... Rev. Gentry is no different. Sad that the clip said "black man" instead of giving him a name crediting his extensive learning, seems he's a victim of exactly the phenomenon that he's pretending doesn't exist.

Hehehe

 

[Liquid]

That's another thing similar to this, almost all news coverage I have seen of the St. Louis issue on British news channels always says "A black teenager was shot to death by a white police officer" with the exact same stress on the word white. Why do they feel the need to mention that the officer happens to be white, why does it matter? Had the officer also been black, would they point that out? I don't think so.

Teenager shot to death by police officer - Fine. Could be a tragedy worth reporting.
[Colour] Teenager shot to death by [opposite colour] police officer - Puh-lease. This is part of the problem.

News teams certainly don't help.

 

[Omnis]

I agree with you mostly, I'd stop short of "scumbag" but overall the tone is right.

Really? He was a thief! That makes him a GRADE A SCUM-BAG. Say it with me! People that rob convenience stores are scum.

Did he deserve to die? No, but let's not pretend he's an angel. Let's learn a lesson from Ferguson: don't be a criminal and precipitate your own death by getting Officer Rambo on your case.

Mike Brown is no Oscar Grant. Now that was a tragedy.

 

[Danoff]

[Colour] Teenager shot to death by [opposite colour] police officer - Puh-lease. This is part of the problem.

Asian teenager shot to death by Black police officer
Asian teenager shot to death by Hispanic police officer
Asian teenager shot to death by White police officer
Asian teenager shot to death by Pacific Islander police officer
Asian teenager shot to death by Native American police officer
Pacific Islander teenager shot to death by Black police officer
Pacific Islander teenager shot to death by Hispanic police officer
Pacific Islander teenager shot to death by Asian police officer
Pacific Islander teenager shot to death by White police officer
Pacific Islander teenager shot to death by Native American police officer
Hispanic teenager shot to death by Black police officer
Hispanic teenager shot to death by Hispanic police officer
Hispanic teenager shot to death by White police officer
Hispanic teenager shot to death by Pacific Islander police officer
Hispanic teenager shot to death by Native American police officer
White teenager shot to death by Black police officer
White teenager shot to death by Hispanic police officer
White teenager shot to death by Asian police officer
White teenager shot to death by Pacific Islander police officer
White teenager shot to death by Native American police officer
Black teenager shot to death by Asian police officer
Black teenager shot to death by Hispanic police officer
Black teenager shot to death by Pacific Islander police officer
Black teenager shot to death by Native American police officer
Black teenager shot to death by White police officer

...that last one is news.

 

[Dotini]

Really? He was a thief! That makes him a GRADE A SCUM-BAG. Say it with me! People that rob convenience stores are scum.

Did he deserve to die? No, but let's not pretend he's an angel. Let's learn a lesson from Ferguson: don't be a criminal and precipitate your own death by getting Officer Rambo on your case.

If you get high, commit a strong arm robbery, strut down the middle of a highway, draw the attention of police and assault the officer by punching his face, you can expect to be shot to death as an act of self-defense by the officer. Would your death be a deserving one? Americans may disagree, but Charles Darwin had the right of it. Michael Brown selected himself to die. We sometimes call it suicide by cop.

 

[Danoff]

If you get high, commit a strong arm robbery, strut down the middle of a highway, draw the attention of police, assault the officer and break his facial bone, you can expect to be shot to death as an act of self-defense by the officer.

Shouldn't be the case. Jail yes.