[sunnyatlast]

It would be nice if the protesters had the maturity to see the value of "innocent until proven guilty", because one day they or their son/daughter/spouse could be the one about whom the grand jury is deciding to indict or not. A thinking, logical person would want everyone to be treated as innocent until proven guilty.

Instead, idle people have been incited to terrorize to get their way with vigilante "justice", like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwJrG2AMghw

And apparently nobody in black elected leadership is teaching them to respect the rule of law and the grand jury process, and to go home and work on being a student or work on finding a job and being useful.

Here is grand jury info:
Answers to questions about the Ferguson grand jury

[justjim]

Without knowing all the facts regarding the case it is difficult to know what the Grand Jury might do. The spin the various media put on it only makes it more confusing to all of us lay people. This shooting is very different from the Martin case.

[Rags123]

Originally Posted by rubicon

Let's be clear here. The only reason this story has or had legs was because of the claims of it being a racist shooting by a white cop. So whether indicted or not a riot will commence. The only difference will be the extent. If no indictment St Louis will burn. If indicted some will riot to express their contempt for the fact that it happened.

America is being held hostage, one incident at a time.

[outlaw]

There are some similarities between Ferguson and Sanford. Mainly, that a violent attacker was shot and killed by the attacker's target.

[manaboutown]

Originally Posted by rubicon

Let's be clear here. The only reason this story has or had legs was because of the claims of it being a racist shooting by a white cop. So whether indicted or not a riot will commence. The only difference will be the extent. If no indictment St Louis will burn. If indicted some will riot to express their contempt for the fact that it happened.

I agree with Rubicon's statement.

The imported professional riot leaders are on site, organized, have their plans, rioters all lined up and are ready to go - no matter what. We can thank the usual race baiters, the Sharptons, Jacksons and others of their ilk for this - again.

I am somewhat relieved the governor has plans in place.

[kcrazorbackfan]

Being a retired LEO and having read everything I can get access to, there is no doubt that Officer Darren Wilson will not be indicted (no true bill) by the GJ. That kid was no saint; he was just a punk thug that had just strong armed robbed a c-store and didn't have any respect for the law. Officer Wilson feared for his life whenever the subject reached in the Tahoe, accosted the officer and tried to take his weapon. Again, there will be no indictment.

Unfortunately, there are going to be riots, worse than in August, and people coming in from outside the Ferguson area will be the main instigators, as they were in August. Having lived in STL from 2004 to 2012, I have several friends that live in Ferguson and they are really scared with what's going to happen.

IMHO, Gov. Nixon did the right thing in mobilizing the National Guard and declaring a state of emergency; they will not be passive this time, they will be carrying weapons while guarding businesses, shopping malls and high profile areas. That will leave the police departments, sheriff's departments and highway patrol to deal with the main groups of rioters. Also, there is word out that terrorists groups will infiltrate the groups of non-violent protestors to create a violent situation with them and police.

It will not happen until after Thanksgiving.

[kcrazorbackfan]

Originally Posted by George Bieniaszek

I would hold a Job Fair in Ferguson!! I bet the rioters and looters will scatter

The only businesses that WERE NOT looted and burned in August were places that sold work clothes and equipment. And you what's really incredible about this? We financed the rioters doing this with the welfare checks we give them.

[dillywho]

What basically the media and everyone else has ignored is that if this kid had not committed a crime in the first place, he would not have been shot whether he was unarmed or armed.

Why is everyone so willing to give HIM a pass as though he had no part in his own demise? Does it not make for as good a news story if this is not brought forth? I have yet to hear any coverage say that he brought it on himself. The officer did not go out that day with the idea of taking out an unarmed kid.....of any race. He was doing his job and having to defend himself during the process. Mike Brown was out with the intent to rob and assault. Therein lies the difference.

[tomwed]

Originally Posted by Chi-Town

Here is an example of how facts get distorted:

snopes.com: Darren Wilson Injury Photo

Thanks for pointing that site out. Do you use that site for fact checking?

[manaboutown]

Looks like agitator Sharpton is quite the tax dodger, too. Rev. Al Sharpton owes millions in taxes - The Week

[wendyquat]

Actually, how do we know WHAT to believe? It's seems to be one lie after another!

[Chi-Town]

Originally Posted by tomwed

Thanks for pointing that site out. Do you use that site for fact checking?

Snopes is a go to site for fact checking. It has even become a verb. "Have you Snoped that yet?"

[pivo]

It was on the news this afternoon how obama said don't let up on the protest.

Also a few months back their was check on the most people visiting the white house and sharptons name was listed.

[tomwed]

Originally Posted by Chi-Town

Snopes is a go to site for fact checking. It has even become a verb. "Have you Snoped that yet?"

I just did. I'm putting it up there on my favorites bar. Thank-you

"So President Obama did meet with the Rev. Al Sharpton, among others, on 5 November 2014; but he did not meet with "Ferguson protesters" (unless one counts Sharpton, who has visited Ferguson, as a "protester"). The meeting was not conducted with a group of demonstrators, but rather with leaders of civil rights groups such as the NAACP and the National Urban League; and it was widely reported on mainstream news sites and blogs. The discussion at that meeting was not specifically about events in Missouri, and President Obama's only reported comment on that issue (which was related second-hand by the Rev. Sharpton) was an expressed desire to see civil rights leaders work to promote peace during potentially difficult days to come in Ferguson.

Read more at snopes.com: President Obama Secretly Met with Ferguson Protesters?

[manaboutown]

Who is snoping snopes? I have heard they are not always unbiased in how they report.