I have been adamantly observing this situation, as I often do with controversial situations like this across the country, and by far the most appalling aspect of this whole thing is people's reaction; particularly on this thread. The level of insanity it takes to justify and defend the response to the looting, protests, and/or riots is astronomical and puts national security at far greater risk than the "War on Terror" ever has. While the militarization of police is nothing new, the War on Terror amplified the actions and scale of these operations which have been ongoing for the better half of three decades now. The "Police State" which is the next step resulting from the war on terror will ultimately cripple our nation as a whole as the tolerance for a demand of obedience will no longer become acceptable resulting in a civil war between civilians and the government and large corporations whom of which influence and in many cases operate our government's standard operating procedure. As our wise founding father Benjamin Franklin once said "those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty no safety."
I do not claim to know what exactly happened in the events of Michael Brown's death as the rest of you don't either. However, these polarized opinions have many flaws to them just as they did during the shooting and death of Trayvon Martin in Florida. Whatever your view on that particular incident may have been, this is what I feel the situation was based off what we KNOW happened: 1) Zimmerman followed him despite orders from local law officials not to 2) Martin realized this and became disorderly at which point the two became involved in a struggle 3) Martin overpowered Zimmerman in which case he shot him in the chest in self-defense. In that particular case both individuals were at fault so I hold no sympathy for either of them. Now as I mentioned what I said is not necessarily FACTUAL, but there is good enough evidence to suggest that that's what took place. However, if I were to speculate I would imagine the events are similar to that of Trayvon Martin only flipped where the struggle happened earlier on, but still ended up in bloodshed, which could be attributed to a number of things, rage, temporary insanity, etc. That said, the local law enforcement's response to the looting, riots, and/or protests is just as inappropriate as the first two aforementioned activities. Even if the rioters and looters had weaponry (which the police has yet to show any evidence that there has been; yes there is property damage, but to my knowledge no one has been injured as a result of these unruly activities) - it DOES NOT JUSTIFY SHOOTING AT CIVILIANS, IT IS A VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.
The militarization of police is nothing new, but the amplified actions and scale of these operations is a symptom of the police state in which we reside. Are there situations where the use of S.W.A.T. teams are necessary? Sure. However, the prefix in S.W.A.T. "Special" is becoming less and less so to the point where standard arrest warrants are being handled by "Special" Weapons and Tactics. To be fair, people were not paying attention when the National Defense Authorization Act was ratified, which allows military personnel to detain anyone for an indefinite period of time without due process. They may not be military personnel, but they sure as hell look like it and many cases receive the training for it, so in their eyes they already are soldiers. Many departments and federal agencies advocate for policies that facilitate these occupy-esque operations in the name of "securing freedom." How are we free if every time someone feels oppressed or commits to civil disobedience (i.e. protests, etc.) that G.I. Joe comes along and treats everyone as a prisoner? One thing you can count on, push a man too far and odds are he'll start pushing back. This is the Ferguson community's way of pushing back after all their alleged years of oppression. Not the rioting and the looting, but the protests. Even if they did not have to proper documentation to protest, are you really going to tell me that a community of oppressed people are going to go to their municipality and ask them to relieve the oppression to speak their grievances? You have got to be INSANE to believe that. Yes, the rioting and looting is unacceptable and should be condemned, however, it is also unacceptable for police to be using excessive force by using rubber bullets, tear gas, etc INDISCRIMINATELY on ALL protests. This is not a bank robbery with automatic assault rifles, this is not a bomb threat... THESE ARE PROTESTS!
Regardless of how you view the situation surrounding Michael Brown, I have one question for all of defending this barbaric kind of behavior... how long? How long? How long is it until your local law enforcement decides that EVERYONE in your neighborhood is too dangerous and therefore begins occupation and/or martial law with indefinite detention, which can be enacted under the National Defense Authorization Act? Unlike ordinary citizenry, law enforcement are guaranteed weapons, people are not. If and when gun control many victims of mass shootings cry and howl at the moon is put into effect along with the militarization of police whom answer to no one, we will effectively become no different than Russia or China and that if anything should make you take a second look at these kind of situations!
Sincerely,
Mr. Cyborg
