"I don't believe there is or should be a difference however evidence shows that the killing was in self defense."
People REALLY need to stop saying this. The entire point of the post is that our entire system is built on the idea that no evidence is valid evidence until it is put through an adversarial trial. You MIGHT mean to say that there isn't enough evidence to proceed to trial, but that isn't the same thing. What was released by the prosecutor was a naked evidence dump that has no context, not contests against it, and has gone through no adversarial process.
As far as the law is concerned, it's meaningless in terms of assigning guilt or innocence to anyone at all....
"Perhaps Michael Brown's family should have instilled in Michael that stealing a carton of cigarettes and then assaulting the store owner when the owner tried to stop him from leaving with the unpaid merchandise and then walking down the middle of a street, placing the lives of motorists at risk and refusing to listen to the commands of a police officer, then Michael Brown would not have lost his life."
Your comment suggests that these crimes are punishable by death at the hands of a policeman in the street. In which case you're a fucking idiot.
"Numerous witnesses (white and black) report that Michael Brown was charging toward the officer when he was shot 150 feet away from the vehicle."
This ignores the ENTIRE POST YOU'RE COMMENTING UPON. The process by which grand juries work almost all the time is commonly altered when a policeman is the one facing potential charges. What you're stating is evidence that should ONLY be presented at trial, not in a grand jury setting. Grand jury settings are a one-sided account by the prosecutor SOLELY of the reasons why an indictment SHOULD be handed down, not why one should NOT. If you'd read the post, you'd know this.
"With that kind of evidence from numerous eyewitnesses (and ballistics evidence consistent with that account), there is really no reason to go to trial. If you don't want to get shot, don't attack cops physically."
Interesting thought. So is it any person who charges at a cop that should be shot at 12 different times while the shooter gets not even a trial to determine the veracity of his claims or of the worthiness of the testimony and evidence? Or is it only people who weight 280+ lbs? Or only 280+ lbs black men under a certain age? Or maybe they have to have committed a crime recently?
Or might it JUST BE POSSIBLE that we expect police officers to be able to deal with criminals in a manner other than double-digit bullet-expenditures aimed at the head?
Re: School Shootings In The US Are NOT Incredibly Rare
That Wikipedia page is the EXACT statistics I've been debunking in three straight articles now, and you went ahead and cited them anyway.
As far as NZ not having any recorded school shooting deaths:
A. I don't believe that zero statistic and B. Ignoring the obvious population and internal topology of the two countries is great if you want to boast about New Zealand but otherwise incredibly pointless...
"FUCK YOU, you bit-brained brainwashed asswipe... you are probably 1/3rd to 1/2 my age, but if you show your smarmy puss around me and say shit like that, YOU WILL BE KNOCKED OUT, wormtongued, human-shaped pile of shit that you are..."
Well, hey, at least you're being levelheaded, logical, and intelligent about, right? Threatening violence on someone for a simple one-sentence observational opinion is sure to win you sell-swords for your side of this fight you're making up in your own head, so keep on gettin' on, soldier!
"so, tell me, does my wife (a single mom for much of her adult life) hate wymns too ?"
No idea. Never heard you mother's words, so I wouldn't be so simple as to pretend to answer this exceptionally silly question.
"so, tell me, do my sisters (both working women who have worked longer and harder than any DOZEN useless pontificators like YOU) hate wymns too ?"
Whereas you'll feel free to just make up how long I've worked, how old I am, and what kind of work ethic I have as compared strictly to the female members of your family, because that's apparently important. I guess this is on me for arguing with a simpleton, but what can I say, I'm a sucker....
"so, tell me, does my bossy horselady neighbor hate wymn too ? because she thinks ALL you femtards are useless mouth-breathers and she has barn stalls to muck rather than contemplate theoretical prejudice of no consequence..."
Gamergate, everyone. Remember: it's all about journalistic ethics. It has nothing to do with women or feminism (eye-roll)....
"i've posted that email address enough that you should be able to find it if you wanted to, big boy... (you will not, JUST LIKE all the rest of the cowardly fucktards who do not back up their stupid shit...)"
And what am I supposed to do with this email address, exactly? Why would I communicate with you there when I can communicate with you right here? Are you...having a stroke or something?
"yet you only have enough testicular fortitude to throw out a nasty, personal comment in your private sandbox, instead of a real debate of some sort ? ? ?"
You thought THAT was nasty? Oh man, I'd be happy to have any kind of debate you'd like, but I fear your skin must be quite thin given the statement above....
"fuck you sideways with a pineapple, you dickless pinhead..."
Let's get the debate started here, then. What is it about sticking things up my ass and my being "dickless" that you think it's a great insult? What is it about people who don't have dicks that you find to be less than yourself? And why is it that you don't have anything against women, except all of your insults have to do with fucking people and the lack of male genitalia? I mean this question honestly, so please try to formulate your response with a complete lack of foam in your mouth...
That John Stewart bit was funny, but ultimately ironic. His chief complaint about Chicago stuffed pizza apparently consisted of his determining that it was more like a casserole than a pizza, then he proceeded to show us all how to eat a New York flaccid pizza piece like a burrito. I was more than a little surprised at the hypocrisy.
Plus, a Chicago style pizza actually has ingredients you can taste, whereas a New York pizza is fried flatbread with once-tasty but now rendered flavorless toppings....
There used to be an old joke floating around the NASA brass that if you took all the staff that worked on any Apollo mission, lined them up, and shouted "Zieg Heil!", roughly half of them would respond....
Re: Simple solution. Lower then speed limits and shorten the yellow light period
Lowering the speed limit doesn't do the trick. As long as we're only BARELY pretending that this isn't simply about revenue, why not go all the way?
The Dark Helmet City Beautification and Enrichment Proposal: variable speed limits! That's right, Mr. Mayor, we create a jobs bill based strictly off of replacing those old metal speed limit signs in the entire city with digital display speed limit signs. Then, we incorporate ASL into the mix: Adjustable Speed Limit.
Speed limits will change throughout the day in random intervals under the bullshit excuse that we're watching traffic patterns and making shit safer for puppies or whatever. What it ends up meaning is that you have no idea what the speed limit on your own block is day to day, or even minute to minute.
THINK OF THE MOTHERFUCKING REVENUE, YOU MANGLED-HANDED MONSTER!!!!
"I guess my first question to you is how we determine what this "best system" would look like."
You model which would result in the most economic and/or artistic output. You study different government's systems which will necessarily have different levels of protection and you measure their output per capita.
"What you think is best likely differs from what I think is best."
Output is the measure the framers were interested in. It's the entire point of copyright.
"I think the empirical approach raises more questions than it answers, and as far as foundations go, it's not a very good one."
Then we have nothing, because we're certainly NOT going to make good policy based on feelings and/or anecdotals.