Al Sharpton: No ‘Circumstances’ Would Require Officer Wilson To Fire Six Times

Al Sharpton: No ‘Circumstances’ Would Require Officer Wilson To Fire Six Times | NewsBusters:
MSNBC
Now with Alex Wagner
August 20, 2014
4:08 p.m. Eastern          

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/connor-williams/2014/08/21/al-sharpton-no-circumstances-would-require-officer-wilson-fire-six-#ixzz3B6NrxOw1

SHARPTON: Well it should be America's agenda to preserve and protect the civil rights of people. You've got to remember that there's no question Michael Brown had the civil right to not expect to be killed or shot multiple times. There's no dispute about that by police when he was unarmed and there was no life extenuating circumstance here. I mean, we're debating on whether he moved forward or not with the policemen, and most eyewitnesses say it didn't happen. But are we serious here? He never had a weapon. There was no life extenuating circumstances that anyone can figure out that required six bullets. So you at least need to have this brought before a court of law because there's probable cause.

IF the policeman in question was, indeed, physically assaulted by the "Gentle Giant", and the circumstances are as he described ... I can think of one reason why he shot his assailant six times:

He ran out of ammo.

NB:  Anything that Al Sharpton is against, I'm for.   Anything he's for, I'm against.
 The man is a congenital liar ... has been all his life.

Two words:  Tawana Bradley

Oh ... and about the thought that Michael Brown had a  "... civil right to not expect to be killed or shot multiple times..."?   That civil right doesn't apply to violent felons.   "As you reap, so shall ye sow".


And that's all I have to say about that.