Ferguson Grand Jury No Indictment of Darren Wilson sends a Powerful Message

What’s the message? It’s simple as long as you wear a badge and a gun, you have the right to initiate a confrontation and if you feel yourself losing that battle, you can now draw your weapon and kill the threat.  You may not be so lucky if you are a civilian but why not take a chance.  You could fall under the George Zimmerman defense or the gentleman who shot and killed that young boy for loud music.  This gives you a 50/50 chance.  But if you are unarmed, hard of hearing or playing with a toy gun, your chances of getting justice may not be so balanced.

Consider this, the grand jury said that Mr. Wilson followed the law and the training he received in law enforcement training but I have to wonder if that is true or have the training changed since I attended.  You see, we were instructed never to engage without back up especially if you were outnumbered.  Mr. Wilson’s odds were 2 to 1.  We were instructed to monitor and track until the numbers were on our side because we were not getting paid to die.  We were instructed that charging into a situation, without having a plan or knowing exactly what we would do was not a sign of a hero but a clear sign of a fool.  We were told that the authority we are entrusted with did not tolerate fools.  So when did all this change and who sought out this change?  Was it because police were being killed by the dozens similar to the number of police shootings or was it because some who can’t help but see another as less than they became in charge?

Either way America, bottom line.  You are supposed to meet force with equal force.  If it is a hand to hand brawl then you use your hands and if it is a weapon then you use your weapon.  It’s what some of us remember as the level and use of force.  You initiated the contact, you drew and fired your weapon at and into an unarmed person, and these are the facts as they should have been presented to the grand jury because any fool knows that the most unreliable evidence is an eye witness.  The evidence was not how the rounds hit the body or what position the body was in when it was struck.  

The only evidence that should have been paramount in the grand jury’s mind is the fact that one person was armed and the other was not.  Guess this is how self-defense has evolved.  The funny thing is even in the Old West, you were sentenced to hang by the neck until dead in the public square if you shot and killed someone who was unarmed regardless of the offense.  A young man is dead, a community forever divided, a city forever labeled all over a box of Swisher Sweets Cigars and we find no peace and no problem with that.