[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by karostay

CNN he was an outstanding father..Even though he was drunk and passed out in the drive through lane

The fact that he was cruel to his kids should be overlooked.

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Good one cold sores.......I got a good laugh!

I guess I missed the funny part, of someone being killed by shooting them twice in the back as they were running away...and then someone says this.

Originally Posted by Byte1

He probably deserved it. Probably saved his family and many citizens of this country a lot of pain. He saved the taxpayer a lot of money for court and jail time.

Could you help us all out, by identifying the part that you "got a good laugh" out of...me finding it pretty unbelievable anyone would say that?


.

[talleyjm]

Because his background doesn’t fit the narrative.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

I take it that the "THERE" definitively settle this issue. But, one small detail....a whole line of people-occupied-cars was close to the shooter's line of fire.

Anyone besides the perp get shot?

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

A drunken, frighted poor sheep that was not treated like a Christian. Would Jesus have shot?

Jesus was not a COP and they didn't have guns in those days. A drunken anybody could have killed anyone's family while operating a motor vehicle. Guess he would not have been called a "frightened poor sheep" by MADD.

[TooColdNJ]

Originally Posted by Byte1

The truth is sometimes painful. But, if anyone sees something in that post that is not what many are thinking or if there is something to suggest otherwise, I am always willing to listen/read their opinion. I would be called a hypocrite if I utilized all the PC I read on here by folks that know nothing about the subject. Like everyone else on here, I merely submit my opinion. Opinion based on experience, I might add And my opinion is that posts accusing law enforcement that are doing their best to protect society, of being murderers is "low as it gets." And I find that to be VERY "shameful."
I am more willing to give the Police the benefit of doubt than a criminal, especially one that has a past and one that fights the police when they are doing their duty. I find lynch mobs, whether physically or verbally to be abhorrent.
Here's some facts for anyone that wishes to argue:

The deceased was intoxicated
The deceased was incapable of operating a motor vehicle
The deceased was uncooperative
The deceased was under arrest
The deceased resisted arrest
The deceased assaulted a police officer (a felony in some states)
The deceased escaped arrest
The deceased stole police property, a weapon
The deceased attempted to use said weapon on the police

Where is what I said "shameful?"

Shameful? That you feel the officers in these situations should be given the benefit of the doubt when their lives were not in danger. . The deceased should not be deceased.

Read a state trooper’s take on this, as a law enforcement officer, somewhere in this thread. If you think all police, all doctors, all teachers, all nurses, etc. should be given the benefit of the doubt as well, I don’t agree. We should trust these professionals based on their duties to society, but it’s a bit narrow-minded if you don’t believe there are a few bad apples in any bunch, as was just proven, but we should give them all the benefit of the doubt because they’re police officers! It’s situational; a man was kneed in the throat and died as a result. The other one was shot—while the officers’ lives weren’t in any danger. They were chasing the guy- they weren’t being chased. You may have the opinion that the scum of the earth may be always be so, but it’s wrong to believe that they should have been killed.., especially for their past criminal activity, and especially if they served time for those crimes. Every criminal is NOT WORTHLESS; some can be rehabilitated. If there are other options- which there clearly were, they should not have killed him. No one has the time to stop everything and look into their entire criminal background. What if they weren’t criminals?

In the recent killings, although having criminal backgrounds, they weren’t committing a murder, rape, armed robbery.... or assault with a deadly weapon. There were no warrants out for their rests because of those violent crimes, either. They weren’t even carrying guns. They didn’t deserve to die as they did. The officers were in no immediate danger.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

I guess I missed the funny part, of someone being killed by shooting them twice in the back as they were running away...and then someone says this.



Could you help us all out, by identifying the part that you "got a good laugh" out of...me finding it pretty unbelievable anyone would say that?


.

MR Cold , I was, actually agreeing with you. You used, very cutting sarcasm to prove your point. The sarcasm was so good, that I liked it. Kudos to you!

[Darnoc15]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

Guess the police do not have the right to defend themselves anymore

From what I Read the victim was shoot in the back while Runing away, does that show the policeman was in danger?

[Darnoc15]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

I condemn ANY cop shooting someone unarmed, who is not presenting a danger to the cop.

PERIOD.

FULL STOP.

You are right!

[ditka41]

IMHO: Until children are taught what "STOP" means, and respect for authority this "stuff" will continue. That doesn't require a great deal of intelligence or money. If the time spent complaining about "injustice" and "rights" were used to educate the youngsters, they probably would not grow up believing laws do not apply to them and looking for opportunities to create "situations". Shame on the parents, regardless of how old the perps are. Memorializing criminals can not be helpful with the problem.

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

MR Cold , I was, actually agreeing with you. You used, very cutting sarcasm to prove your point. The sarcasm was so good, that I liked it. Kudos to you!

My bad...thank you.

While I admire your public bravery, you do realize what you've now done though...don't you?

You have now gained innumerable enemies...from my "fan club."

And durn it, what really sucks is that so many of them are really in deep arrears...with their monthly fan club dues.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Originally Posted by crash

The Taser was a contact taser and he grabbed and ran 45 minutes after first contact.

Don’t think a taser justifies shooting and killing him. All I will say if he had been white would the officer have shot him.

There is not such thing as a contact taser. A taser fires a cartridge that is attached to the gun with cords. But once the cartridge is expelled, the taser can operate as a stun gun which may be to what you are referring.

Police are trained to shoot people that have tasers or stun guns because they can render an armed officer helpless and the officer's gun can then be taken from him.

The only argument that might be made in this case was that there was another officer there who could have prevented that from happening.

I'd like to know if Atlanta police are trained to shoot when fired upon with a taser or if a person has a stun gun.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Originally Posted by Darnoc15

From what I Read the victim was shoot in the back while Runing away, does that show the policeman was in danger?

You read wrong. I saw the video. Mr Brooks was running away. At one point he turned and fired the taser at the officer and the officer returned fire. Now it is possible that Mr Brooks turned back away from the officer at the last second catching the bullets in the back.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Originally Posted by crash

It is not about George Floyd it is the straw that broke the camels back. This was not the first black person unjustifiably killed by the police this year or even that month.

Nine unarmed black men have been killed by police in the past year. I'd say that the camel's back wasn't very strained.

[TooColdNJ]

[QUOTE=jimjamuser;1784776]What the world and the US of A needs now.....in the sense of money/resources stolen from the taxpayer is MORE IRS officers to catch the white-collar criminals. That money recovered could pay for more neighborhood beat police PLUS many social workers.[/QUOTE