urbanSTL

Northside Neighbor wrote:As things start to quiet down in Ferguson, and the dog days of summer change to the sweetness of fall, people will start returning to their old ways of doing things, and nothing will have changed in STL.

Agree or disagree?

Things will change to a degree. but probably not to what needs to be done.... I'm not sure we're up to it. Also, anyone want to place bets on a power outage during the 100 degree heat wave coming up? Seems like the gods are playing with us.

innov8ion wrote:Perhaps unrelated to crime, but tangentially related to racial and other divides w/in the St. Louis region.

"Is KMOX the true voice of St. Louis?" - https://twitter.com/innov8ion/status/502092112444145665

KMOX Management,

While driving to work this morning, I reflected while listening to KMOX' perspective on the Mike Brown story. The paternalism was striking and the hosts' relatively narrow perspectives served well to highlight an apparent racial split within our region.

In trying to better understand this phenomenon, I accessed http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/station/kmox/ and discovered that just one person out of over 20 hosts and news reporters is African American. Out of all 50 faces on that page, I only noticed two African Americans.

An overwhelming share of the problems in human society are caused by both lack of understanding and empathy for others. To that end, I think we can agree that local media has the ability to build bridges of understanding and help dismantle divides within our region.

In the wake of the Michael Brown incident, can KMOX do more to build understanding in the St. Louis region by employing voices that better represent it? Only through diverse representation can KMOX truly be referred to as the, "Voice of St. Louis."

To be clear, I'm not pointing fingers. I just think it's a worthwhile conversation to have. Don't you?

Regards,
Dave

Could they do better? Maybe, but you will never have a balance that entirely reflects the population. We should transition our discussion from why African Americans don't have representation on a police force, to how do they obtain that representation. I would argue the Ferg PD has only 3 AA's because there aren't enough qualified applicants to go around.

Education and training are the main issues here. You can't change something from the outside in. I am all for a police force having a racial dynamic that reflects a population but setting a quota isn't the fix.

downtown2007 wrote:

innov8ion wrote:Perhaps unrelated to crime, but tangentially related to racial and other divides w/in the St. Louis region.

"Is KMOX the true voice of St. Louis?" - https://twitter.com/innov8ion/status/502092112444145665

Could they do better? Maybe, but you will never have a balance that entirely reflects the population. We should transition our discussion from why African Americans don't have representation on a police force, to how do they obtain that representation. I would argue the Ferg PD has only 3 AA's because there aren't enough qualified applicants to go around.

Education and training are the main issues here. You can't change something from the outside in. I am all for a police force having a racial dynamic that reflects a population but setting a quota isn't the fix.

The composition of media staff needn't closely reflect the population but in many cases it can be improved. Education and training, while positive, can never replace diverse backgrounds and experiences.

I appreciate the feedback!

Northside Neighbor wrote:As things start to quiet down in Ferguson, and the dog days of summer change to the sweetness of fall, people will start returning to their old ways of doing things, and nothing will have changed in STL.

Agree or disagree?

Disagree, the attitudes may not change but the government structure will be forced to change for one reason. MONEY! The amount of lawsuits that will be filed against the city of Ferguson, St. Louis County, and Missouri will essentially bankrupt this part of the county and the ripple effect will be felt throughout the region.

I think the least amount of damage that will be done is that the city of Ferguson files bankruptcy and has to contract fire and police services from St. Louis County. Maybe even forcing it to dissolve into unincorporated St. Louis County. I could be wrong, but I see thousands of civil lawsuits coming out of this event and the cost of fighting them is enough to cause serious financial strain to the city of Ferguson and St. Louis County.

I also think it gives Rex all the fire power he needs to the St. Louis government reform issue in Jefferson City. The argument will be that St. Louis Co. has too much bureaucracy and it has become a major financial drain on the state.

goat314 wrote:^ The problem is it looks like a complete cover up gone wrong. If he was truly innocent and it was a justifiable homicide, like the one that just happened in the city, then why was it necessary for him to skip town? Why isn't he defending himself? Why is the evidence being hidden? How did Brown get a bullet in the top of his head, in a downward motion? I think the whole thing reeks of unaccountable, small town, corrupt police department. If this happened in a back alley nobody would question the cop, but since dozens of people saw him use excessive force the police have to come up with a story. I for one think Mike Brown had questionable character, but this incident isn't about Brown's character, its about a very messy police operation and an obviously trigger happy cop. Since Wilson skipped town and hasn't come forward it easy for him to break his own eye socket or continue to fabricate a narrative. The shop owner has come and said that he never reported the incident. Too many eye witnesses on the scene have similar accounts of what happened. The autopsy shows that it is a strong possible that he did in fact have his hands in the air when he was shot. The whole thing is just messy and really an embarrassment for our region, state, and country.

A lot of this makes sense to me, especially considering yesterday's shooting and how it was dealt with. If it's not a cover-up (because I tend to not believe in conspiracies, even of the inept/botched kind) then it's definitely egregious and inexcusable incompetency. For some time I'd thought St. Louis was a bit of a powder keg in terms of its race/class divisions but I didn't envision anything near this.

And that St. Ann cop pointing the assault rifle and screaming "I'll ***** kill you" at those people yesterday? Man, that's messed up. People wanna talk about "black ghetto culture" but how about talking about "angry/aggressive cop culture"?

Anderson Cooper is showing video of the shooting in the city. The man is not 3 feet away (knife range) when the police start shooting it seems to me. Check it out.

Just saw the video of yesterday's shooting on CNN, and all I have to say is wow. Had NO idea it was like that. The amount of shots that rings out in the video (not seen at that point) is horrifying. I just don't understand why they have to let a volley of shots that's clearly going to kill the guy when he's walking toward them. Why not a taser? Why not back up and give a shot to the leg if you must? Didn't seem like they were in immediate danger to me.

I am VERY glad that last night was relatively peaceful in Ferguson. I'm not sure why, but it's a start.

I also think Chief Dotson deserves credit for being forthcoming about the shooting on Riverview Boulevard. However, without footage of the incident between Officer Wilson and Michael Brown, we really cannot compare the situations. Does the use of force seem excessive in both cases? Perhaps, but how do we determine that? There's still a lot about both incidents that we simply don't know, and so much more we need to know. That's why these investigations take so much time.

While we can/should question the actions of police in these matters, I would also like to draw some attention to our elected officials, especially those who have said rather inappropriate things over the last couple of days in my opinion.

- What was Governor Nixon thinking when he called for a "vigorous prosecution" and "justice for Brown?" Would the media have let it slide as much if he called for "justice for Officer Wilson" and advocated for clearing him of all wrongdoing? Nixon was questioned by Shepard Smith of Fox News (yeah, I know what you think, but I believe Shep is fair) and he was given a change to restate or retract his words, but his spokesperson said he meant a vigorous investigation. Whatever. It's clear whose side the governor takes.

Let's not forget, either, Nixon's ineffective leadership from the minute the news traveled beyond Greater St. Louis. Lt. Gov. Kinder legitimately criticized Nixon's words and actions. I think that leadership breakdown needs to be addressed further.

- Jamilah Nasheed's words didn't exactly help, either, as she suggested (threatened?) things could get much worse if Officer Wilson isn't charged with a crime. Seems to me that she could express her feelings without incendiary remarks.

I don't like using the number of shots fired to determine "excessive force". Once a cop has decided it's necessary to shoot someone to defend themselves, they should shoot until the offender has stopped. There's no distinction between mostly dead and excessively dead, and cops shouldn't be judged on that basis. Handguns in real life aren't as precise as on TV; shooting someone in the leg to slow them down shouldn't be considered a serious option.

MarkHaversham wrote:I don't like using the number of shots fired to determine "excessive force". Once a cop has decided it's necessary to shoot someone to defend themselves, they should shoot until the offender has stopped. There's no distinction between mostly dead and excessively dead, and cops shouldn't be judged on that basis. Handguns in real life aren't as precise as on TV; shooting someone in the leg to slow them down shouldn't be considered a serious option.

That's a good point, Mark. It's also why I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to officers in both incidents. We're also talking about handguns that fire multiple shots in rapid succession; it's not like officers use six-shooters these days.

I think it would do a lot of good to put yourself in the shoes of the police officers. Why take the risk of getting stabbed in the neck by a lunatic with a knife by using a taser or just shooting once? Being to cautious will get officers killed. That man was coming after the policemen, ignoring police officer commands, and likely would have killed them if he had the chance. These cops are risking their lives and the livelihoods of their families every day to protect this region. They should and do have protections in place so they can go home to their families. Don't wanna die? How bout not approaching a police officer with knife?

Tasers aren't a rapid fire gun are they? It's one shot and zap right? What if the officer misses or there is a malfunction. Then the oficer is F'd. That's why they're trained to shoot.

moorlander wrote:I think it would do a lot of good to put yourself in the shoes of the police officers. Why take the risk of getting stabbed in the neck by a lunatic with a knife by using a taser or just shooting once? Being to cautious will get officers killed. That man was coming after the policemen, ignoring police officer commands, and likely would have killed them if he had the chance. These cops are risking their lives and the livelihoods of their families every day to protect this region. They should and do have protections in place so they can go home to their families. Don't wanna die? How bout not approaching a police officer with knife?

Tasers aren't a rapid fire gun are they? It's one shot and zap right? What if the officer misses or there is a malfunction. Then the oficer is F'd. That's why they're trained to shoot.

Good post. I can't remember exactly how many times the officer tried to neutralize the situation, but they commanded him several times to drop the knife and he refused. I suppose it's easy to be an armchair quarterback, but the reality is I don't know how anyone else could have handled the situation differently. We may discover the same is true for Officer Wilson once more facts are revealed, but I suppose only time (and the facts) will tell.

I don't know much about tasers, but I agree, you go for what's most effective. To reiterate Mark's point, I think the question of excessive force is more about whether a gun is necessary in the first place rather than the number of shots fired. In my humble opinion, based on what we know about this case and Officer Wilson's account of his situation, it seems like there was no choice. Then again, I am willing to give these officers the benefit of the doubt until the facts prove otherwise.

I can understand what you're saying if there were only one officer. But two cops--why not have one using non-lethal force, the other ready to shoot? Why not retreat a little and tase? He wasn't running at them; he was ambling and stumbling around like he was not quite with it. And cuffing the guy while he's on the ground dying? Mind boggling.

I accept that it's legally justified but I can't accept that that should be normal operating procedure.

Trigger happy cops scare me. Another aspect of the horrible gun violence problem this country has.

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2013/oc ... t-released

48 officers killed in the line of duty and 52,000 assaulted... i give the benefit of doubt to the police in this situation.

wustl_eng wrote:Trigger happy cops scare me. Another aspect of the horrible gun violence problem this country has.

Me too, but in a city where 120 murders per year is some sort of vast improvement, criminals with guns scare me more.

^ The man was obviously mentally disturbed and find it insane that the cops used this type of excessive force. If two "well trained" cops cant take down a crazy, smallish man with a butter knife, I don't think they are qualified to be police officers. For one, the man was literally 10-15 feet away when the cop started shooting and he was definitely not running towards them in any type of swiping motion. This is clearly police brutality and excessive force. The police have tasers, mace, nightsticks and a slew of other weapons to disarm a mentally challenged, petty thief, with a Swiss army knife. Also I find it utterly insane and dehumanizing that officers continued to shoot this man when he clearly was splattered all over the pavement, then they handcuff a dead man, and get aggressive with traumatized citizens. I'm really disturbed that so many members on this board shrug this off like its nothing and I have to wonder if you guys would feel the same if the race and/or class of the actors were switched. Seriously disgusting!

^ Michael Brown was unarmed and had a bullet in the top of his head and he was 6'4'....clearly something is wrong. Cops nationwide apparently think its open season on Black men and women no matter if a crime was committed or not. That is why people are angry. Its dehumanization. Even the Aurora, Colorado killer wasn't killed and he had major gun power!

Seems pretty basic to me: don't attack and threaten police and you won't get killed by them. I'm sure more training to deal with mentally ill people is great, but this does appear to be a suicide by cop. I don't care what color the guy is.

^ So police brutality is not a problem?

goat314 wrote:^ The man was obviously mentally disturbed and find it insane that the cops used this type of excessive force. If two "well trained" cops cant take down a crazy, smallish man with a butter knife, I don't think they are qualified to be police officers. For one, the man was literally 10-15 feet away when the cop started shooting and he was definitely not running towards them in any type of swiping motion. This is clearly police brutality and excessive force. The police have tasers, mace, nightsticks and a slew of other weapons to disarm a mentally challenged, petty thief, with a Swiss army knife. Also I find it utterly insane and dehumanizing that officers continued to shoot this man when he clearly was splattered all over the pavement, then they handcuff a dead man, and get aggressive with traumatized citizens. I'm really disturbed that so many members on this board shrug this off like its nothing and I have to wonder if you guys would feel the same if the race and/or class of the actors were switched. Seriously disgusting!

What was the weapon, actually? In the course of this page it's already shrunk from a steak knife to a butter knife to a swiss army knife.

Well-trained cops aren't psychic aikido masters, and knives very are dangerous. Engaging a knife-wielding crazy man at hand-to-hand range is a big risk, and I don't think cops are obligated to take that risk. They have a right to preserve their own lives. It's a shame that this guy decided to commit suicide by cop, but there's only one insane person in this scenario. The Michael Brown case is very dubious in many respects, but in contrast this one looks far more justifiable.

There are plenty of examples of police using excessive force, but shooting a mentally challenged knife-wielding attacker isn't a very good case study.

^ again the Colorado killer had automatic weapons and still living. What tactics did they use to subdue him? Bundy had 100s of militia men with him in Nevada, yet he is still living. The point is, if you are black, armed or unarmed, the cops feel it necessary to kill you if they feel slightly threatened. That is not a good defense. Where are the tasers? Why was it necessary for both cops to shoot him that many times? Why was it necessary to handcuff a dead man? Why was a necessary for them to get belligerent with community as if they lived in an occupied territory. This whole thing is insanity.