[MetaCosm]

A lot of your post is you just saying things you think with no evidence, what your "gut" tells you, etc. Not going to respond to those, because they are not very interesting. Let me share one of my personal opinions with no basis in fact: cake is superior to pie, there I said it!

> But what if Brown wasn't attacking the officer but defending himself?

We actually got into a bit of a debate at dinner discussing if you have the right to defend yourself against an unjust arrest -- short version: "nope". In 1900 there was a case that went that way, but since then it was been reversed... and even more specifically overruled in various state ordinances. Even if you did have the right to physical resist (again, you don't, so don't resist arrest) an "unjust arrest" ... you aren't informed of the reason you are being arrested at the time of arrest, you don't have enough information to even claim it is unjust.

> If Michael Brown is struggling to get free after being unnecessarily assaulted by Wilson and then sees Wilson draw his gun then of course he is going to strike the officer trying to flee.

This is put forth as factual "of course". But, it isn't the common case -- most people when assaulted (justified or not) by a police officer surrender, and if it escalates to having a gun drawn... they... you guessed it, surrender. The vast majority of police officers make it to retirement without firing their weapon while on duty.

> First, I'm sure most people believe that if a police officer tells you to do something you do it. That might be really good advice, especially if you have brown skin, but I think it's not reasonable to blindly obey over-aggressive and unfounded requests just because the person has a badge.

You can think what you want, but you have NO RIGHT to EVER resist arrest, that is the simple fact, there is no law on your side, and it will end horribly for you. You submit, you get arrested, you offer NO resistance and then you take action AFTER the fact (sue, try to get them fired, take it to the press, whatever).

[malyk]

All of my points are based on the parts of the event that have no clarity. They are open to interpretation. That's why I'm offering plausible and reasonable alternative explanations. Because how those events unfolded directly relate to whether it was a just shooting or not.

As to your last line. I realize that legally you are correct, but I just can accept that you have to be compliant because of a badge...especially when we live in a society that has a horrible track record of justice when people with brown complexion are involved. Action after the fact, especially with the rate of discipline and conviction of police officers, is just not a very realistic option.

And pie definitely beats cake! ;)

[sillysaurus3]

Totally agreed about the pie. About the other part, though...

I'm really interested to know what you could mean. Isn't it, well, kind of mistaken to feel like we shouldn't cooperate with officers? The power asymmetry is just too great, on a practical level. But beyond the cold facts, it seems like the basis of a functional society is to cooperate. In a situation where there's an injustice, the media might be able to help if you write up a compelling story, though it's true that'd be a remediation after the problem occurred. It just seems like not cooperating will cause more problems than it could possibly solve, in every possible case. So it's interesting to me, and I'd love to get your perspective on some situation where it could be helpful.

[malyk]

I don't really know where it would be helpful. I just find it "show me your papers" totally morally repugnant. I mean, I don't want to disrespect police officers (my closest friend is one), but you don't get to be a total authoritarian asshole just because you have a badge.

In a society where the citizens respect the police and the police respect the citizens then the Ferguson issue probably doesn't happen. And that's the issue I have. It's an us against them mentality on both sides. Cops are hated, so they don't get out in their communities to meet people, so they are viewed as "invading", they only show up to take your loved ones and their friends away, so they are hated, etc.

So yeah, the power asymmetry is too great, and it doesn't need to be for officers to be effective. In fact, I think it's doing the opposite. It's making their jobs harder.

[sillysaurus3]

Could we not be so aggressive? It's an important issue, and the best way to close people's minds is to belittle them. Besides, malyk's concerns are legitimate, and they've spent time researching this issue. We should be the ones willing to listen to all points of view. I know passions are high about this, but progress requires patience and a willingness to explore all the ideas.

[MetaCosm]

Aggressive? My post was mellow except my response to

> I think it's not reasonable to blindly obey over-aggressive and unfounded requests

which is a perspective that will LITERALLY get someone killed if they believe it. That is why I used uppercase, because it is actually really important, not everyone takes the time to properly research what rights they have (and don't have).