Within months, media coverage of police brutality has increased exponentially. Who is to blame for these fatal encounters?

The event that took place in Ferguson, Missouri, opened people’s eyes. Police Officer Darren Wilson responded to a robbery report; upon arriving at the scene, he found Michael Brown (18) along side a friend.

The aftermath of the alleged confrontation left the murdered Brown, facedown in the middle of the street with multiple bullet wounds, blood pouring from his head. His body was left in the summer heat for about four hours.

Even if the homicide was a necessary one, leaving a murdered human being who was shot down like an animal at the scene for that many hours cannot be justified by any means.

This divergence of protocol is what led to the riots. In any other circumstance, these would be called protests; however the language of the media sways in favor of the police, not the citizens voicing their rights.

Nevertheless, considering the Kroger incident on September 10th, is it not reasonable for police to use as much force as possible when disabling someone?

A witness at Kroger said a group of nearly 125 kids were playing a game called “Point The Out, Knock Them Out.” As the name implies, someone points out a person, and everyone would collectively attempts to knock the victim out.

The group, consisting of mostly teenagers, brutally beat strangers to the point of hospitalization as their game. If this is what teenagers are doing as a means of entertainment, it might be reasonable to initiate a preemptive attack.

According to Police Chief Magazine, the training officers receive for approaching a suspicious looking or dangerous person drags on for nearly six months. This is a long time to hear constant reaffirmation of “Shoot to disable, only kill if necessary.”

Police are trained to function in stressful situations. In the Ferguson case, how could there be justifications for multiple chest shots followed by head shots?

“He was in a tense place and needed to protect himself,” is not an adequate reason for Officer Wilson’s action. A single person approaching a police officer does not need multiple shots in the chest and then another in the face.

When those who protect the people violate protocol, the people have the right to defend themselves.

The actions of some unruly citizens cannot be justified, but the police who initiated the violence should not be excused either.

Murdering an unarmed person from a distance is not defense, and protesting against the police is not synonymous with rioting. Furthermore, many policemen are trespassing against the people’s freedom of press and are trying to prevent footage of these brutalities from leaking.

Do not let your rights get taken and your humanity be robbed from you. Obtaining evidence acts is necessary.

On September 24th, a driver was pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt. The officers demanded identification from the passenger of the car; however, when reaching into his bag to get his ID, the police officer took out his gun.

Shortly after the driver called 911 to explain her fear about the way things were being handled, a policeman broke the passenger side window to pull the male passenger out of the car and used a stun gun against him.

Because the fourteen year old son was filming the events from the backseat, the family now has a chance of bringing a little bit of justice and protection back to Hammond, Indiana.

The attacks against civilians are increasing faster than those against the police force. In order to maintain protection, every shadow of the justice system needs to be brought into the light.