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

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?


.

Because his background doesn’t fit the narrative.

Anyone besides the perp get 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.

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.

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!

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

You are right!

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.

My bad...thank you. :o

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." :D

And durn it, what really sucks is that so many of them are really in deep arrears...with their monthly fan club dues. :1rotfl:


:ho:

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.

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.

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.

[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

:a040: :BigApplause: :mademyday: