ManMadeGod

@manmadegod: Was it really Reigns they were directly booing? I saw it as them booing them the event and how the rumble was managed. Think Roman was just the fall guy.

As has been said in this thread many times already, it wasn't the outcome, but the execution of it that has everyone so angry. After Bryan got eliminated all of the air just got sucked out of the building and the rest was filled with as many calculated and almost blatant middle fingers to the fans that they could cram into a match. They knew that no one would be happy with it so they decided to force it that way anyway in the bluntest manner possible, confident that everyone will still be on board with their ten dollars because it's The Road to Wrestlemania. Not me.

@manmadegod: Ok lets just say he punched the cop in the face. Should the consequences for punching someone in the face be death?

@rebel_scum: Should the penalty for being a thief/bully be death?

Do you know what would have provided a clearing in some of the grey area surrounding this situation? A real trial.

Sorry, you are one hundred percent wrong here. Ferguson is not a reaction to a single event of perceived injustice. It's a reaction to hundreds and hundreds of years of injustice. If it wasn't Michael Brown, it would have been Eric Garner or Tamir Rice or Trayvon Martin. You are missing the big picture.

So a little history lesson: The Seven Years War had a branch in the New World called by us as "French and Indian War" which was an astounding success. If you lived in the colonies out on the frontier, you were probably weeping for joy at the British Army breaking the back of French colonial aspirations in your backyard. The problem was that this success was expensive and labor intensive. Now they had a bunch of British troops stationed over here and spent a lot of money to win where the sensible thing to do from London's view was to order the states to host the army and apply taxes to help pay for the gigantic expense. For a lot of colonists, this made sense: American Colonies where the beneficiaries of the war where they should pay something for it isn't crazy or unreasonable.

At the start, it wasn't that any of the states were unhappy to host troops and pay taxes or that they weren't represented (as far as Parliament was concerned, states could ask Parliament to pass laws and acts just like any other constituents). The problem was a state would say "Lets do this tax" or "This is the best place to station troops" and some general or London would "We'll do this instead". Up until the final break a lot of people considered themselves British subjects and had no interests in breaking with 'home'. There is a lot of evidence lying around that if London had just said "Massachusetts (or whatever colony), you need to give us 1 million pounds. Raise it how ever you want" and negotiated like that then a lot of the problems and unrest would have been reduced.

Fun side note: This "mistake" was the basis of The English Civil War years before which is why a lot of left for America in the first place...

So now we see there is a place where the citizens have some complaints and suggestions but those in power appear to not listening or care about it. When the protests get bigger, instead of trying to find a solution and bring in those leaders to work out a solution, those in power bring in bigger troops. Yeah..its totally different.

"Patrol rifle". Fucking hell, how is that a thing?

@manmadegod If you actually believe this is over a single injustice, and not decades of institutionalised injustice, you haven't been paying attention. This shit is the result of something much bigger than Michael Brown.