'The Shooting of Michael Brown Essay\r'

'Michael chocolate-brown was an 18 year old faint man who was shot and killed by natural law jurisprudence officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri 08/9/2014. Michael had intensions to go to college with no previous criminal record. The death of brownish sparked attendant events in Ferguson and became a national controversy touching on much larger national issues of race, justice, and police violence. This event grew even more national anxiety when police reacted to protesters, even those acting peacefully, with military-grade equipment such as armored vehicles, tear gas, rubber bullets, and sound cannons. Ties amid local residents and their government arose again when heard the investigating into the scare awaying, inherently secretive grand jury legal proceeding and subsequent reactions which controlled by mostly whit politicians in spite of Ferguson’s majority black population. One of the main reasons this shooting grew national attention was the fear unr emarkably held by many parents is that black lives matter less, particularly in the face of increasingly heavily build up police who carry tremendous legal freedom.\r\nAllegedly, Wilson claimed that Brown was charging at him and he fired 6 gunshots at the unarmed man. Brown died 150 ft. from the car, despite in the first place statements that Brown died just 35 ft. from the vehicle. Two of the six-spot shots were fired at the head of the unarmed man. Eyewitnesses who went familiar said Brown and Wilson had a confrontation at the officer’s SUV. Brown ran and Wilson chased afterward Brown and shot the teenager to death as he attempted to surrender. Constitutionally, police officers are allowed to shoot to protect their life or the life of other innocent party, and/or to prevent a suspicious from escaping but only if the officer has probable arouse to think the suspect’s committed a serious violent felony. Officers must demonstrate that their actions were objecti vely reasonable given the circumstances and compared to what other police officers might do (According to David Klinger, University of Missouri-St. Louis Professor).\r\nWilson needed to demonstrate that he feared for his life non just when Brown was by the car, but even after he started shooting, he needed to establish that Brown continued to rank a threat to him until the last fired shot. Brown’s family urged a Michael Brown law pursuance Grand Jury’s Decision not to indict Officer Wilson. NAACP, National Action Network, and others stand been working with the family to create a law where it requires that both police officer in every American city is required to have film remains cameras that record every move they make.\r\nThe benefits of officers wearing body-worn video technology include demonstration that both officers and civilians acted in a more positive manner when they were conscious that a camera was present, new opportunities for effective readines s of law enforcement officers presented by the use of cameras, and useful evidence of interactions was often captured on video (as reported on the white house petitions gov page). This would be a Consequentialism outcome where the consequences of one’s conduct are the eventual(prenominal) basis for any judgment about the refinement or wrongness of that conduct. Hopefully, this Law will put one over up the major hurdles the black residential area continue to face in the United States twenty-first Century.\r\n'