Statement on Ferguson Incident: Michael Brown Deserved to Get Shot

In a story that is rocking the news, in Ferguson, Missouri, a Black criminal thug named Michael Brown engaged in a strong-arm robbery of a convenience store, stealing a $30 box of cigars in a violent robbery. This thug, deceivingly named “The Gentle Giant” by his criminal-supporting “civil rights” supporters, was nothing more than a typical young Black thug. His supporters say, “He had plans to go to college.” Yeah. All young Black thugs have “plans to go to college.”

Anyway, Brown, after just engaging in a violent strong-arm robbery of a convenience store, was walking down the road with his thug friend not long after the robber committed his crime. Like morons, the two were walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic, which attracted the attention of the police. How stupid can you get? You rob a store, and then instead of lying low you walk down the middle of the street blocking traffic virtually insuring that the police will show up and probably connect you to the crime you just committed.

Logically, a police officer soon showed up and order to two men to the sidewalk. It was then that the officer noted that Brown resembled the description of the robbery suspect. He ordered the two of them to sit down on the pavement. Instead of complying, the two men attacked the officer. The officer was outside his vehicle, but Brown shoved the officer back into his vehicle. Brown then attacked the officer as Gentle Giants are wont to do. He then tried to steal the officer’s gun. The officer fought back against Brown, pulled out his weapon and shot Brown once.

Brown then ran out of the vehicle with the cop in pursuit. The officer fired on Brown as he was running away. Brown then stopped, turned around, raised both hands in the air and surrendered. The cop then shot him two more times for good measure, and Brown fell down dead.

Of course, the first shot was completely justified, but the shots 2-4 were not. In the US, you are not supposed to shoot at a suspect who is running away and of course you are not supposed to shoot at a man who is surrendering.

The Michael Brown case has become the lastest cause celebre among the criminal supporters who hide under the label of the “Civil rights movement.” This great movement for the emancipation of Black people has become perverted by Identity Politics into a movement for the support of Black criminals and thugs.

Many Black supporters of criminals took to the streets of Ferguson, Missouri to protest that one of their criminal heroes got killed by a cop. They then rioted and looted like they always do whenever US Black folks engage in street protests.

Micheal Brown was nothing but a dirty Black thug. Now he is dead. It couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy.

The “Civil rights movement” has a new Black thug hero.

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

39 thoughts on “Statement on Ferguson Incident: Michael Brown Deserved to Get Shot”

  1. “The officer fought back against Brown the thug, pulled out his weapon and shot the Black thug once.”
    This could be, but the autopsy fond no “gunshot” residue on his skin, which is usually present when a gun is fired on someone from close range. But there might yet be gunshot residue on Brown’s clothes. That will be known once his clothes are examined.
    ” The officer fired on Brown as he was running away.”
    Really? On what do you base that?
    ” Brown then stopped, turned around, raised both hands in the air and surrendered. The cop then shot him two more times for good measure, and Brown fell down dead.”
    Once again, on what do you base that? One eyewitness whose voice can be heard in the background of a video at the scene says that Brown turned around and started charging Wilson.
    This account is consistent with what Wilson told Josie, a friend of his who called in to a radio station to give Wilson’s account of what happened. CNN has given this account the “nod.”
    BTW, it would be nice if there were more blacks who looked and acted like Don Lemon.
    Furthermore, the police have gathered 12 eyewitness accounts that are consistent with Josie’s account.

    1. 2 feet or more away and there will be no gunshot residue. Officer said he shot Brown from inside his car and witnesses seem to back that up.
      I am repeating the standard story that I heard from the media here. I only became aware of the cop’s story recently.
      Who is Don Lemon.

      1. Why should he fire in a way that man could potentially die, instead the officer could have aimed at Brown’s legs from the second shot and could have made him immobile …

        1. Standard procedure is to shoot most accurately at the perpetrator (as to not leave anything to chance). That said, deadly force is obviously unnecessary in most cases, and for a number of reasons. One of them is that rubber (non lethal) bullets are just as effective at incapacitating a dangerous suspect.

        2. My thoughts exactly, what’s the need to kill unless the boy had lethal weapons.. Saddens me to see human life lost in petty issues

        3. “…officer could have aimed at Brown’s legs from the second shot and could have made him immobile …”
          I can tell you don’t have a lot of experience shooting pistols. Hard to shoot someone in leg. Even if they’re standing still. The only people that can shoot like this are special forces and people who shoot for a living and they shoot around 50,000 rounds a year to do this.

  2. At least Brown is in Hell rotting, with that box of cigarettes. I am literally shaking my head. The Black community needs to wake up and stop wasting time with this “raycissm.” These fools keep blaming the White community for their own failures. If we left them in Sub Saharan Africa, these fools would still struggle to build mud huts and live past the age of 40. Disgusting creatures.

  3. I have lately developed a theory regarding the officer involved shooting of black men.
    What would happen if police departments echoed the racial profile of their neighborhoods with their officers? Ie., black dominant neighborhood, predominantly black police officers, Mexican-dominant neighborhood, predominantly Latino officers.
    Would all the rioting be subdued if Brown were shot by a black cop? Would there be less unrest? Would the ‘hood be more supportive of its officers and more willing to see the case for what it is other than a platform for racial turmoil?
    Or it could just be too simple a solution. Common sense doesn’t seem to be common enough these days.

    1. Unfortunately your idea of having more black police officers in predominantly black neighborhoods won’t work. The fact that Michael Brown was shot by a white police officer is only part of the perceived problem. The other part of the problem is that the rioters (and their supporters) object to our country’s whole socio-economic and political system which they believe exists solely to oppress them, therefore any black police officers would be considered nothing more than self-loathing sellouts.

      1. ‘Unfortunately your idea of having more black police officers in predominantly black neighborhoods won’t work….’
        I do not agree. I tend to believe that yes , there would be a perception of some of the black officers ‘ selling out’ , it would however ,greatly decrease the incidence of rioting. I think the racism is a bigger issue than perceived socio-economic gulfs. It only took the black Highway Patrol chief to calm the riots by walking with the protesters in Missouri.
        So yes. It will work.

        1. It wont work as some Black officers will definitely engage in corruption and bias.Just 2 weeks ago,A robbery took here in Qatar where a Black guy robed a jewellery store and got away with 5 kilos of gold.The chief officer of that area was also Black(Note that they were Arabic speaking though) and he let the robber slip out smoothly by somehow dismissing the incident as carelessness of the storekeeper.Ofcourse there were doubts regarding bribery and it turns out from a close source that he paid around 3000 Riyals to the officer.Although the country got strict laws over bribery but he still managed to break through otherwise there would definitely have been protests by the black community even if the officer had arrested the robber.

    2. Did you consider that black police officers might object as they don’t want to always be assigned to the most dangerous areas?
      I saw a case a while ago of a black police officer stamping on the head of a black man who was handcuffed and on the floor. Some of the black people there spoke out against it and a bit of a fuss was made about it and some local leader or activist got invovled. It probably would have been a bigger deal if a white cop did it though as inevitably the whole issue of race becomes invovled.

      1. ‘Did you consider that black police officers might object as they don’t want to always be assigned to the most dangerous areas?’
        No I did mot consider that at all. Simply because it is not a factor. SOMEBODY WILL want a well paid job. Better that it is somebody the natives identify with.
        Not trying to be snarky, I just think it is a great idea nobody has tried yet. Unless, there is evidence to the contrary.

      1. ‘also some people might object, seeing it as a move towards segregation.’
        True. We could toss a few whiteys in the mix. It doesn’t have to be strictly dark for dark, just predominantly so.

  4. Ever do that thing where yer tryin not to puke but it just goes through your nose instead? then it’s kinda stuck there for hours, just hurting and stinking? yeah, that’s how reading this felt.

  5. A poisoned culture (Hollywood, rap music) has unfortunately made all blacks potential criminals. Sure some good black people are out there, but unfortunately get grouped with the bad.
    In many places, Europe etc.., American citizens are stereotyped as being bad (troublemakers etc..), so I know the feeling. It doesn’t seem fair.

  6. I think the cops are usually WAY out of line but in this case it seems the cop may have been correct. I’m hearing now the cop was charged at by him. If you notice a lot of the shots were in the arms. ALL cops aim for the center of mass, the chest. Why would he shoot his arms way up in the air if he wanted to kill him. Makes no sense at all. If he was charging him his arms would be lower near his body. Hence the wounds on his arms.

  7. Robert,
    When you keep using the word “black” alongside “criminal” and “thug”, it could understandably makes it appear to some that you think Michael Brown deserved to be shot dead because he was black. That’s what happens when you make synonomus “black” with “criminal” and “thug”.

        1. Ok I fixed up the article somewhat. I do not want to encourage racist dicks to post on this blog. I really hate these Black thugs, but I hate the anti-Black racists almost as bad.

      1. No, they’re not. There’s peer pressure among black kids to look tough, so thug is a fashion personna. The pose is the first step onto the slippery slope into true thugdom. It seems few have connected the dots between racial profiling and deliberate adoption of the thug profile.

  8. Because a lot of Black guys who wear their pants like that are thugs.
    You know why they do it? It’s a prison thing. In prison, a lot of guys wear their pants low. What’s weird is that i hear that in prison, that means you take it up the ass.

    1. How is that any different than white people having tattoos, apart from the homosexual thing? Either way, your making the statement, I’m doing something bad-ass that polite society objects to.

      1. The difference is a LOT of White guys have tattoos now. When I was young that generally used to mean you were a scumbag, but now it seems they are mandatory. So now if you see a White guy with tattoos, it just means he is trying to be bad-ass. He might be a really nice guy, and a lot of them are not criminals or bad people at all.
        Now when you see a Black punk with his pants hung low like that, that is a very different statement and there is a very good chance that this guy is a bad person at the very least and in fact he is probably a criminal of some sort.
        Let me sum it up. The White guy with tats might invite you over for a beer. The Black guy with the low slung pants might just try to rob you.

        1. Perhaps, but I saw a black guy with sunken pants in one university class. He didn’t seem that threatening. It seemed to be more of a fashion thing with him, like with tattoo wearing white guys.
          I think the underwear said “Hello Kitty” Nah, just kidding.

        2. Why don’t you come to my neighborhood and check out the Black guys around here who walk around with their pants like that. Around here when a young Black male walks around with his pants hung low, that’s pretty much of a marker for “bad person,” and if you have any sense, you will stay away from him.

        3. IIRC, The whole baggy pants, pants on the floor gangster chic wear…was originated back in the 80’s when gangbangers wore oversized pants to conceal a shotgun in one of the legs. It then became a fashion statement, because it represented being gangsta-like. Such a shitty fashion statement. However, ALL of the coolest welfare recipients wear their pants that way.

      2. Having tattoos doesn’t take away from common sense and functionality. It’s common sense to wear your pants appropriately, as they were designed, and it’s not functional to wear them in a way that compromises movement and locomotion. It’s also not civilized at all, or even sanitary. Plus they can, and do, fall down. Tattoos are more decorative, like earrings, only permanent. But some people have bad fashion sense, not just bad tattoos, as many tattoos are.
        Others have artistic tattoos of better value. It doesn’t matter what pants you wear – if you where them below your ass, you look like an idiot, and you’re more likely to be a thug, or a thug sympathizer. “No snitchin’ now!”

    2. A lot of racists on Facebook love to comment about sunken pants, so they say racist things, without coming out, and admitting they’re racist.

      1. Civil Rights leaders hate saggy pants. Do you like them? Do you approve of pants being worn that way? Are there not wiggers who wear pants like this?

  9. I’d be pretty much frightened of any black people, unless they were from a church, whether they had low pants or not.

    1. Why did the black man where a tuxedo to his visectomy? “Because, if I’m goin’ to be impo’tent, I might as well look impo’tent.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)