I've recently read an article about how protestors are planning peaceful protests  once the verdict of the officer is read, or more to the point, announced. The chances are more than likely that he'll be acquitted of the charges given that all the evidence has supported the police reports thus far. The protestors claim that they can disobey police orders, and this would be correct. It's called Civil Disobedience, a fact many of the commentators on the article seem to have forgotten about. Civics 101 people, look it up.

     Do I see breaking police lines as "peaceful"? Answer to that is, it doesn't matter. What matters is that it does fall under the category of Civil Disobedience, and police need to be aware of this. No, to me what is far more disturbing than the planned protests is the comments on the article. Here are two of the most disturbing out of 5000+. I'm sure there are more just as, if not more, disturbing.

     LTC writes, "You need to hire a few thousand people to document the civil disobedience of the black community. You're telling them to cross police lines bud to do it peacefully. REALLY??? You're teaching them to break the law peacefully... If they so much as touch a police officer they are committing an illegal act and should be dealt with accordingly. You think you can bully the police by holding hands and walking slowly towards them and crossing their lines? If there are boundaries and you try to cross them then it is no longer a peaceful demonstration. I hope there are some people out there smarte enough to understand that, Pluas as you can see the one girl has her face already covered, I will guarantee you she has evil intents. I want everyone to videotope the blackes or what that cause the "disobedience"   This is followed by the reply from David of, "I'd rather they kill them than videotape them." Which them? The police or the protestors? If the former, that is tantamount to calling for civil war. If the latter, the man calling for this action is calling for flat out murder of peaceful protestors. Either way he needs help.

     Let's look at what Philip writes, "Huh, why are they choosing to protest for a criminal, who, on video strong arm robbed a convenient store for cigars... is caught with them... who then hands them to his homie and attacks the police officer... he has a record and is known to be violent...

     I could see riots after MLK was assassinated but I cant see protesting over another dead criminal...

     I hope feds bring in national guard and the all get gun butted in the back in the head... then carted off to some camp where they are not allowed to contact anyone and heavily tortured and then we don't see them again... just like the socialist camps in the countries that Obummer and his ilk would like to turn this one into.." Which he then follows with, "As with Hitler, we start with the undesirable." And who is to make that determination?

     To be sure there were some valid points. Two wrongs do not make a right being the one that actually made the most sense. This is a situation that is charged with anger, hate, and anxiety on both sides. As such it has the potential to become a complete disaster. Level heads? Calm minds? I doubt these exist in this situation. Really, anyone can do at this point is to pray that this doesn't blow up in to something much more than it needs to be.

     The article can be found here along with the 5000+ comments. Some of them are reasoned, and well thought out. Most of them, sadly, are not...

http://news.yahoo.com/awaiting-ferguson-grand-jury-activists-drill-protest-tactics-192355963.html