VID: Ferguson Protestors React to Michael Brown Security Footage

|

"Ferguson Protestors React to Michael Brown Robbery Footage," produced by Zach Weissmueller and Paul Detrick. About 3 minutes. Original release date was August 15, 2014 and original writeup is below.

This morning, Ferguson police chief Thomas Jackson revealed security footage showing that Michael Brown, the 18-year-old shot and killed by police officers in Ferguson, MO, may have committed a "strong arm" robbery against a convenience store owner. The chief later acknowledged that the officer who shot Brown was not aware of the robbery at the time of the incident. 

Reason TV talked with protesters in front of a burned-out QuikTrip that looters destroyed earlier this week. Most saw little reason that the new information should dampen their outrage towards the police, and some even justified the destruction of private property as necessary and effective in garnering attention for their cause. 

Advertisement

NEXT: "What I Did After Police Killed My Son": The Argument for Independent Review Commissions

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. and some even justified the destruction of private property as necessary and effective in garnering attention for their cause.

    Morally no. Practically yes, but I highly doubt greater than 10% of the people involved in the looting had that thought even cross their minds while it was going on.

    1. In practice, destroying property adds to the “civil unrest which the govt must cure” narrative.

      1. I spent years living in neighborhoods like this one, Eddie, trust me there are no good options for the people living in them in these matters. You’re a regular Joe and you protest and you make yourself, your associates, and family a big, fat target. City cops in my experience are vindictive pricks, as a class, and all the incentives in the world are right there to get them to indulge in the urge to engage in it. I hate to see what is going on, there are going to be real negative consequences, and the libertarian in me really dislikes the looting and destruction of property, but the poor, homeless kid I once was is also inside cheering it on hoping that somehow it might get enough people to notice how bad it has gotten. It’s a long shot, but nothing else is working, either.

        1. Mob violence which actually targets the perpetrator is one thing. That’s not what’s happened here. They’re not burning cop cars, cop stations, cop’s homes. They’re not beating or killing cops.

          A wolf and a rabid dog need the same treatment.

          1. I admit I’m conflicted, but “targeting the perpetrators” in this case is practically volunteering someone else for martyrdom. I am also all in favor of the local property owners shooting looters. If that sounds irrational it is because it is. I’m a person, not a robot. I do know that if there weren’t a good chunk of people perfectly content with the cops fucking with people like these in Ferguson as long as it’s not happening to them or their special snowflakes then none of this would probably be happening. I suppose I’m trying to find a bright side to look on in this mess.

            1. After the Highway Patrol reestablished order, the Alex Jones in me believes that some of the Ferguson PD, mostly likely the Vice desk, gave some “incentives” to certain folks to start looting again.

              1. Either that or there are some bad actors that require something other than hugs and hand-holding to deal with.

                Still doesn’t justify the military rifles and armored humvees. Cops in ordinary riot gear should be enough.

                1. All it would have taken to avoid it entirely is one wearing a body-camera.

                  1. Eh, I don’t know. To many people, you should never ever shoot an unarmed person. That was the whole Zimmerman/Martin thing in a nutshell.

                    People believe in some kind of Batman/Queensberry rules bullshit where the good guy is only allowed to defend himself with the tools the aggressor brings in.

        2. I work in a shithole neighborhood in NY, and respond in with the cops to shootings stabbings and all sorts of emergencies. What I see are too many bully assholes like Mike Brown combined with cops that are scared shitless when ever tensions are high and the locals start to get loud and rambunctious. I see fear in those cops eyes and They dont look like they can handle those pressure situations, so you see so many just panic and epty their guns into anything that moves.

          1. If that’s, in fact, the case, I would start by hiring a higher quality individual to start with.

            1. Absolutely. Ny has lowered the standards for cops and firemen to retard levels to get more minorities and women on the force.

        3. This is a thing that I don’t think gets enough attention – many people are looking at this one isolated incident of a cop shooting a guy and then see what appears to be an over-reaction by the neighborhood and an over-reaction to that by the cops. Given the reaction of the neighborhood to this “one isolated incident”, I have to guess that this isn’t just one isolated incident of a cop treating somebody like dirt.

          The neighborhood jumps to the conclusion that the cop was entirely in the wrong and the kid was entirely in the right and we can criticize them for jumping to conclusions, but I don’t think the conclusions were so much a giant leap as a tiny little step.

          I don’t think the cops were necessarily over-reacting to the unrest, either, perhaps they knew damn well how badly they had been abusing those people and fully expected that once they got pissed off and fought back some cops were likely to die.

          You and I can talk all we want about would have been an appropriate response to the situation, but I would think the people actually in the situation might be better about judging what an appropriate response is. If you assume that the people involved are responding appropriately, it’s not so hard to fathom that the problem is the cops felt like they can go around killing people with impunity but knew that at some point those people were going to return tit for tat.

          1. Very well put. In some places these feelings are almost a physical thing. Like everyone is just waiting for the one thing that sets off the fireworks. In Ferguson that one thing was this shooting. If there wasn’t already a powder keg just waiting for a fuse this doesn’t happen.

          2. I suspect what’s going on in Ferguson isn’t just about the kid that got shot and the cop that shot him, it’s about years and years of abuse by the cops. The cops weren’t preparing to defend themselves against some angry mob out for justice for some kid who got shot, they were preparing to defend themselves against an angry mob out for revenge against years of abuse. You aren’t going to resolve this issue just by dealing with that one cop who shot that one kid.

    2. And since we acheived our goal of national attention we are going to now return all the stuff we stole.

    3. I dunno, when I see someone on the news running out of an electronics store with a flat screen TV in his arms, my first thought is, “he must be fighting for social justice.”

  2. Unfortunately, the net result of this will be “ZOMG we needz more pleece with badder weaponz to protect us from teh thugs!”

    1. What does the “Z” in ZOMG stand for?

      1. zOMG is a varient of the all-too-popular acronym “OMG”, meaning “Oh My God”.

        The “z” was originally a mistake while attempting to hit the shift key with the left hand, and type “OMG”

      2. What does the “Z” in ZOMG stand for?

        Zod.

  3. Just FYI. The store that Brown robbed was looted by protestors last night.

    I think there is a darker racial angle to this than some people are noticing.

    1. I see what you did there..

      ..but I’m not quite sure what you mean by that.

      1. I think there is an aspect of black racism against other non-black minorities here.
        Brown strong-armed the little indian store-owner half his size, and the the mob looted his store in revenge for the video being released. Ugly.

        1. There’s always some conflicting racial undercurrents in places like this (which is a fucking dumb as any other kind of racism), but I doubt it was the prime motivator for the attack or Brown’s conduct, for that matter. It was more likely that once the police used the footage to make their PR case that the store became a target, and would have basically no matter who owned it. (If the store was owned by some popular local black person, I could see it breaking differently, so I am not totally discounting your point, just debating the significance of it.)

          1. Well if you argument is that the police are overly aggressive because of racial prejudice, it doesn’t help your case much is you then proceed to smash up an Asian guy’s store because he has the temerity to complain about being victimized.

            1. None of this is really what you’d call a reasoned response. It’s emotional outbursts followed by rationalizations. I doubt very much that the store owner wanted to get publicly mixed up in the PD’s PR campaign, either. I’m guessing they made that call on their own.

              1. I am certain he did NOT. According to news reports, he denied to the media that any such incident occurred. That’s why it took a FOIA request to have the video released. He didn’t want them to release it, because he was afraid of being targeted by the mob. Well, apparently, his fears were completely justified.

                1. Pretty reasonable fear. Mobs are like fire, they go where the wind blows. Hopefully he can use his insurance settlement profitably, but it still sucks.

            2. I’m with Dances on this. I highly doubt they robbed his store out of some anti-Indian subcontinent racism. In fact, he sold blunt wraps. It’s nothing short of a miracle that he wasn’t looted days ago in a neighborhood like this.

              1. So you think it’s just a coincidence that the same store that Brown robbed gets smashed up the night after the video showing Brown robbing the store is released?

                1. I think the video is exactly why this store got smashed up. The police using the video to promote (justly or unjustly) Brown as an official Bad Guy turned it into a symbol. I don’t think race was a serious motivator for doing it. While I imagine that there was some of the normal bullshit racial tribalism so common in minority communities (as there always has been in America even when those were white minorities) in play, you’ll note that it was only after the video was used by the police who are the primary driver of their anger that this store was hit.

                  1. Well, not really, the store was “hit” by Brown, shortly BEFORE he was shot. And the way the whole robbery went down just seems bizarre. I mean, it wasn’t like a hold up or anything. It was like he just casually decided to steal a bunch of Swisher Sweets on the spur of the moment, physically bully the store owner, and then proceeded to walk down the middle of the street carrying them openly. Seriously, what kind of robber (A) just steals cigars, rather than cash, and (B) then casual walks around like nothing happened? Under what sort of social circumstances does this scenario make any sense?
                    The only thing I can think of is if he was confident that the store owner wouldn’t do anything about it, like if he felt the store own would be too scared to report it to the police.
                    Either that or he was high on something other than weed.

                    1. You are projecting too much rationality onto people, dude.

                      I have lived in some pretty awful hoods. I have seen so much stupid that it hurts to think about it. So much stimulus – response to emotional triggers or for peanut sized social posturing. In some ways the world in these places is so small, things so desperate or hopeless seeming that little things take on irrational levels of significance.

                      So much of it, including I’d wager 90% of the looting isn’t about stuff so much as it is about having power and/or being viewed as having power. That’s the big motivator for so much of this otherwise utterly senseless behavior.

                    2. I have seen so much stupid that it hurts to think about it. So much stimulus – response to emotional triggers or for peanut sized social posturing. In some ways the world in these places is so small, things so desperate or hopeless seeming that little things take on irrational levels of significance.

                      Sounds like faculty politics at any university.

                    3. Rationality? No. Racism.
                      Why is it that when some social sleight happens to a black person the inference is immediately that there must be some kind of subtle subconscious racism at work?

                      But here’s this Asian store owner who (A) get robbed, and then (B) gets his store smashed up – as a direct result of reporting it to the police, and we’re supposed to think that the store owner’s race had nothing to do with it. Like black looters can’t be at least in part, subconsciously motivated by racial animosity.

                    4. Rationality? No. Racism.
                      Why is it that when some social sleight happens to a black person the inference is immediately that there must be some kind of subtle subconscious racism at work?

                      But here’s this Asian store owner who (A) get robbed, and then (B) gets his store smashed up – as a direct result of reporting it to the police, and we’re supposed to think that the store owner’s race had nothing to do with it. Like black looters can’t be at least in part, subconsciously motivated by racial animosity.

                    5. Seriously, what kind of robber (A) just steals cigars, rather than cash, and (B) then casual walks around like nothing happened? Under what sort of social circumstances does this scenario make any sense?

                      Someone with low impulse control who’s used to using his size to take what he wants?

                      Seriously, if Brown had been 5’9″ and 150 pounds, I doubt he’d have been that blatant about stealing the cigars. It’s a classic example of someone raised in a hood environment where social preening and dominance takes precedent over long-term consequence determination. Not taking the cigars because “hey, this might get me shot” doesn’t occur to someone like Brown because they’re used to using their size to control their environment. The possibility of negative consequences for their impulses never even occurs to them.

                      You talk to some of these kids in schools after they’ve started fights or acted out in class, and when you ask them why they did it, their response is typically “I don’t know.” And they’re actually telling the truth–they really cannot process why they couldn’t exercise even a bit of self-restraint and avoid getting in trouble. They don’t have the emotional or intellectual maturity to understand why they act the way they do, because the environment they grow up in is so dysfunctional that it quite literally retards their growth as citizens and human beings.

                    6. “They don’t have the emotional or intellectual maturity to understand why they act the way they do, because the environment they grow up in is so dysfunctional that it quite literally retards their growth as citizens and human beings.”
                      You are including the schools they got to as part of the environment, yes?
                      Just trying to make things clear.

                    7. Another discrepancy is that the police said there is no reason to charge the man that was with Brown, even though he was apparently in the store with him.

                      If that’s the case, then one must wonder if this was, in fact, a robbery, or rather something else being interpreted as a robbery.

          1. Right. I am certain that there was some sort of racial undercurrent going on with respect to this store, which may be motivated Brown’s robbery in the first place.

  4. some even justified the destruction of private property as necessary and effective in garnering attention for their cause.

    Looters gonna loot, and that’s why I shoot.

  5. OT:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..ot-go.html

    Oh they’re in for a really really bad time.

      1. The Italian descriptor sufficed to cover those additional adjectives.

    1. Meh, sure it says they were kidnapped. But they were clearly anti-Assad, which means they were pretty much endorsing the radicals. Maybe they actually went with them instead of being kidnapped.

      1. But they were clearly anti-Assad, which means they were pretty much endorsing the radicals.

        Or they were trying to help the civilians caught up in the fighting, and got kidnapped by animals for their trouble.

        1. Or they were trying to help the civilians caught up in the fighting

          Well, that’s the thing about civilians. “Civilian” is not always a synonym for “innocent”

          Jamir said after ISIS arrived in his town, Arab neighbors of his turned on the minorities and helped ISIS kill. “They join them, and actually they kill us.”

          “People you know?” CNN asked.

          “Yes,” he responded. “People — our neighbors!”

          Jus’ sayin’

          1. Yeah the Religion of Peace strikes again.

          2. Not to mention that they’re pictured in several of the photos accompanying that article at several anti-Assad rallies. While they went to help with “humanitarian” causes, I somehow doubt they would treat Assad’s soldiers or victims of the rebels successes.

      2. Yeah, like ISIS gives a shit.

        Do you recall what happened to the blond Polish woman who was kidnapped by insurgents in Iraq?

        And, um, Jessica Lynch?

        1. No,what?

    2. I have a “thing” for blondes. . . but the brunette. . . yowzah!

  6. So, just to make clear as business owner, in peaceful times I get to pay 30-40% of my net profit in taxes, licenses, fees, etc and have a goodly amount of my overall practice regulated, while in troubled times I get to have my business burned to the ground.

    Where do I sign up?

    I mean really. You’re either being pushed around by one set of thugs or another, and you’re not protected from either one. If you’re actually a producer in this country, you simply have a big ol’ target on your back. The hardest part to take, the thugs who haul off your stuff in peace time hand you some cock and bull about being necessary yada yada yada, but when the shit really hits the fan, you’re out their on your own anyway.

    1. And if you depend your property with a weapon you’re a racist.

    2. Looting the Asian guy’s store has really soured me on the protestors “cause”.

      Here they brought in a black highway patrol officer to calm things down and make nice with the residents, what do they get for it? A racist mob smashes up the same store that the murder victim robbed because they don’t like having it pointed out that Michael Brown was a theiving thug.

      1. The looters wait until the cops leave to put on their riot gear, then drive up from elsewhere to grab the goods while the cops are too busy being “safe” to stop them. Last night, the protestors themselves got between the looters and the stores.

        Apparently, it doesn’t pay the cops or the media to distinguish between citizens trying to air their grievances and crooks. The citizenry is getting tired of that–but nothing seems to change.

        Where have I heard that before?

      2. Looting the Asian guy’s store has really soured me on the protestors “cause”.

        Collectivizing, Hazel? These are the same people? Or are they just neighborhood thugs doing stupid shit?

        None of this changes anything that the cops did to begin with. None of this changes the fact that they murdered an unarmed 18 year old. What the thuggish cops have done, as usual, is elevate someone undeserving to a hero status.

        1. More like sympathizing with the store owner.

          First he gets robbed, then he gets looted, and he’s the only actor in the while sorry mess that is totally innocent.

          1. Oh, no question. Other than Brown, he was probably screwed the most.

    3. That sounds like the Alliance. Unite all the planets under one rule so that everybody can be interfered with or ignored equally.

      1. That sounds like the Alliance. Unite all the planets under one rule so that everybody can be interfered with or ignored equally.

        I’ve never understood how Whedon can be such a progtard and yet create that show.

        1. Sometimes the artist rises above himself. Eg, Mel Gibson.

        2. From what I understand, Tim Minear, who was executive co-producer, is responsible for the libertarian-ish themes.

    4. +100

  7. I’m waiting to see the scenario of someone defending their property against a giant mob. It’s gonna really put a dent in the anti-high capacity firearms narrative. Unfortunately said individual better have a whole lot of video documentation.

    1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzkBGQx3HAc

      Looters are rational actors. They won’t stormed a heavily guarded store.

      http://blogs.riverfronttimes.c…..damage.php

      1. That’s why you don’t let them know you’re heavily armed. Lure them in with a feeling that they’ll be able to safely steal all your property. Then unleash the Kraken when a critical mass make it inside. Belt-fed SCAR could do the world many favors in such cases.

        1. I’ve no wish to get into a gun battle. At all.

          1. The looters don’t generally come in armed.

            1. No such thing as an unarmed man. Human beings have been killing each other for thousands of years, long before there were firearms.

              I’m not armed to for the purposes of playing cop. If I die trying to play the hero, there will be no flag draped casket for me. No pension. No memorial.

              I carry to keep myself safe. That’s it.

        2. Good luck running your business again after the riots shut down after that kind of reaction…

          I think the store owner was probably lucky that the store was burned down and nobody hurt. Now he can take the insurance money and start up somewhere less volatile.

      2. Looters are rational actors.

        They are also rationalizing actors. If you’ve been taught all your life that the only reason you’re poor is because the rich have been oppressing you and stealing that which is rightfully yours, when you’re taught all your life that welfare and food stamps and housing vouchers aren’t charity for which you should be grateful but entitlements for which you should be angry that you’re not getting more of, when you’re taught all your life that the reason that one store in your poor neighborhood charges high prices is because the Korean owner is a greedy racist bastard that it’s therefore okay to steal from instead of being taught that he has to charge high prices because he gets so much stuff stolen from him, it’s easy to justify liberating TV’s on the grounds that the TV store owner has less of a right to that TV than you do.

        1. Great summary of what its like in these bad neighborhoods. Add shitty cops to that and this is what happens.

          1. Thug life is a short life.

      3. Looters are rational actors.

        I’m not sure you’ve thought this through sufficiently.

        If you conclude that even amoral looters respond to threats to their person by more or less accurately weighing the positive of free shit against the downside of eating several 5.56 rounds, you have denied the substance of animal spirits and the necessary existence of the tax-fed technocrat and his lieutenants who are responsible for society’s safety.

        Since the idea that society could survive and thrive on the basis of an emergent, undesigned web of lawfully, but not legislatively, enforced incentives that would eliminate the ruling class, your argument is invalid.

        1. By Keynes you’re right! I shall report to the reeducation camp this instant.

  8. Every time the social media report that cops are getting out the riot gear, the looters get in cars to swoop in and clean up while the cleaning’s safe. When the protestors last night saw that the cops had become useless again, and the looters were getting busy, they started getting between the businesses and the crooks and stopped it themselves.

    Except for the very first episode that destroyed the now-famous QT (personal note: That was my backup QT when the ones at I-270 were too busy *sniffle* ), all the looting was people taking advantage of the lack of useful police presence; they came in cars following scouts. It’s also entirely possible that first outbreak was because the cops with dogs started to advance on the crowd, and a lot broke and ran–and some decided it was time to get paid for their troubles.

    Also, for what it’s worth, contrary to media impressions, the looting hasn’t been particularly massive. The individual stores hit would probably disagree, and their losses are certainly important (and should be prosecuted), but I believe the total number of places hit is under 25, and most of them were small store-fronts that line W. Florissant. There has been some opportunistic spill-over trying to take advantage of coply thumb-plugs, but so far the city of Ferguson ain’t burning from rioters.

    I just wish I lived a leeeeetle farther away….

  9. Why is there music playing in this video? Is it suppose to move me or something? Just let the people talk and cut the music off guys.

  10. there was a good argument to be made. Even outlets like Salon and New Republic had noticed the growing militarization of police forces. Rand Paul’s essay in Time had gained some traction. And, then. A night of looting. Nothing kills sympathy for your cause faster.

    1. Hopefully not as it was the protesters who protected the stores, not the militarized police force.

  11. http://twitchy.com/2014/08/13/…..son-riots/

    Marcotte brings the derp.

    1. From the comments:

      LinTaylor FreedomRecon ? 3 days ago
      Yeah, why can’t they be real women like her, throw away their guns, and just kill their children instead?
      25 ? Reply?Share ?

  12. Several people asked why the video of Brown as a robbery suspect wasn’t released immediately.
    This is why.

    1. Ferguson cops had wanted to release the video on Thursday but held off when federal officials asked them not to release the tape

      1. The Feds said it was because they thought it would intensify the riots. But I think they just didn’t want the narrative about police racism against a loveable kid to be ruined.

        In a perfect world, that punk would still be dead, it would just be the diminutive Indian shopkeeper who pulled the trigger.

        1. This. Obama and Holder are straight up race hustlers.

    2. Yes, and we were told by the police chief that he had to respond to valid public record requests. The delay was apparently the DoJ telling them not to release it because it would inflame. But who? What it does is take a lot of steam out of people like me who are still crazed by the overreaction and the war toys.

  13. It sucks, but it seems to be the only way that any action is action (ie Bush charging the Rodney King cops after the LA riots). A stern letter to the Editor, or even worse, to your Representative, doesn’t cut it.

    Having said that:
    1) The business owners have every right to kill anyone looting their property.
    2) I don’t understand why they loot their own neighborhoods. If I lived in, say, Harlem, I would take the subway down to 5th Ave in midtown and loot one of those stores that sell $1000 purses.

    1. If they react with riot gear and tear gas when they riot in the hood, how do you think they’ll react if they riot in the good parts of town? Tactical nuclear strike, maybe?

    2. That sounds like a good way to get killed quickly.

    3. Should we ever get another LA Riots and the rioters decide to take it to the rapidly gentrifying streets of my urban chic location, I’ll rack up a body count that would make the 14 year olds playing COD jealous.

    4. They loot their own neighborhoods because the business are owned by non-blacks and there is racial animosity between the residents and the business owners.

    5. OK, all good answers.
      Though I’d give a lot to see 10,000 pissed off blacks and Puerto Ricans tearing up those stuck up shops on 5th Ave. where I couldn’t afford to buy a belt in.

      1. Then you’re as much a vicious scumbag as those looters would be.

  14. In a stretch, even for brain-deads, Toles figures it’s up to the NRA to keep things like this from happening!
    http://www.gocomics.com/tomtoles#.U–MVMrka64

    I, OTOH, find it a shame that abortion wasn’t widely available when his mother was pregnant.

    1. Smug, moralizing, and completely unaware of the existence of Colion Noir. Trifecta!

  15. “Dunphy”?

    http://www.nationalreview.com/…..ack-dunphy

    “? “Jack Dunphy” is the pseudonym of a police officer in Southern California.”

    1. Probably where our missing “hero” got his screen name.

    2. Yeah our dunphy is not the Dunphy who writes for NR occasionally.

  16. This whole Ferguson thing is getting annoying. Black people acting black thats all it is. Still thinking the white man owes them something, get over it already.

    http://www.AnonWays.tk

    1. How do you program an Anon-Bot to be racist?

  17. Negroes shoot Negroes every single day. And that’s not considered a problem. Maybe what they need is Negroes on the police force for when somebody needs killing.

  18. Looting does not = protest. Even if the argument were that it did somehow, it helps not a whit that the “youth” engaged in it seem like kids at a candy store. And looting their OWN local store, too, another genius move.

  19. Today’s “wow, aren’t cell phones changing our society” moment is a video of the crime scene with two witnesses talking about the incident in the background, including: that the “kid” went into or onto the cop’s vehicle; that the (6’5″ 280 lbs) “kid” left and walked down the street then turned around and came back at the cop. Just like in the convenience store.

    In other words, consistent with what the cops said at the outset.
    So, was he high on something other than weed? Something a little more aggression-related?

    So, cops, now even you can’t help but get body cameras. THEY CAN HELP PROTECT YOU TOO. Lose the war gear, get the cameras in the epaulet and car dash.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.