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.

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

Here is a link about Mr. Brooks that most of the media is not talking about.

Media Portrays Rayshard Brooks As Loving Father Despite Criminal Charges Of Cruelty To Children, Battery On Family Member, False Imprisonment – TB Daily News

He didn’t just run away

Thank you! The left wing IT outfits are making it extremely difficult to locate through computer searches background information on both these thugs, Floyd and Brooks. The lamestream media wants to portray them as virtuous responsible law abiding contributing members of society who were mercilessly gunned down by racist police officers whereas in reality they were any but such folk. They were convicted violent felons.

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:

You didn't see the beginning of the video. Police received a 911 call that a man had fallen asleep in his car in the Wendy's drive through lane. When the first officer arrived, he bangs on the window to wake the man. The man then drove the car over to the parking space and fell asleep again. The officer woke him again. That's where you saw the video begin.

He was in line at the drive up window so it has to be assumed that he drove the car there. Then he drove it to the parking space and actually ran it up onto the barrier before it backed down.

When the officer woke him for the second time, he didn't remember being in the drive through line. He was obviously on something and obviously drove the car.

You'd better watch all of the available videos. This was a completely justifiable shooting.

Here are the facts as I know them to be. If I'm missing anything, please let me know.

The police received a 911 call that a man had fallen asleep in his car in the Wendy's drive through line.

An officer arrived at the scene and found he man asleep and woke him.

The man then drove the car to a parking space where he went up onto the curb and back down.

The officer had to wake the man again.

The man had trouble communicating and finding his license and the officer noted the strong smell of alcohol.

The officer called for a breathalyzer qualified officer.

The breathalyzer officer arrived and began asking questions. Mr Brook gave conflicting answers to the same questions. He did not remember being in the drive through line or driving his car to the parking space.

The officer, with the permission of Mr Brooks administered a breathalyzer test and found that Mr Brooks was to incapacitated to drive and asked him to put his hands behind his back. As the officer was attempting to handcuff him, Mr Brooks began a scuffle with the officer and they both fell to the ground. Mr Brooks then grabbed the officer's taser and proceeded to run. the officer pursued. After a short pursuit, Mr Brooks turned and fired the taser at the officer and the officer returned fire hitting Mr Brooks.

Please tell me what I missed and how the officer might have handled this differently.

I don’t feel that was a justified killing. I think shoot the perp in the leg to stop them but not in the body! I feel cops don’t realize the damage a bullet does to a body. Criminals are terrible but cops must handle them properly and stop shooting them for simple disrespect! That’s the reason cops are shooting people and it’s not acceptable.

I don't know how much of the video you watched, but the police were very polite and treated Mr Brooks with the utmost care and respect prior to him assaulting the officer, stealing his taser and firing it at him.

In fact, Mr Brooks was very respectful and cooperative until the officer attempted to handcuff him.

All excellent points, but unfortunately the actual underlying issues of why this keeps happening... are primarily twofold.

1. The police unions are so powerful, that prosecutors are leery to even bring up charges against LEO's...because of the likelihood their prosecution will be unsuccessful.

2. The reason the prosecutors have the deck stacked against them is for a number of reasons, but you can bet every single cop knows that they are almost untouchable from criminal prosecution...or even being permanently terminated.

The laws basically allow them to be... "bubble-wrapped" (yeah, I borrowed that term :D)


Difficulty in prosecuting bad cops (click here)



And you can bet your last dollar, those facts are in the back of every single cop's mind and especially with the 1% of bad ones...and/or of those (a much higher %) who emotionally have no business being in law enforcement. :ohdear:

I mean cripes, who in the world can watch the Rodney King over-the-top and totally unwarranted beating (given that he was certainly no threat)...and not shake their heads at how those involved got away with it?

If you watch any documentary of King's case, it quickly becomes evident that a change of venue to a much more receptive jury pool...was the foundation of the outcome.

And then we get the miscarriage of justice with OJ, which those same documentaries basically call 'payback' for Rodney King.

NEITHER of those cases...received true justice.

If the unions (which also includes teachers) did more to police their own people, a LOT of the problems we're seeing now...would go away.

And this is NOT a general "anti-union rant," because in a lot of cases unions actually protect the employees...from abusive supervisors/employers.

WoW so nice to get a real experienced viewpoint on this and thank you a bunch for chiming in to educate us all! The cop clearly should have handled it differently and it’s a shame too many of them are seemingly shooting out of feeling disrespected. I wonder about the training program if the cops are operating off emotion all the time like this and destroying their lives and others who don’t deserve to die?
Much respect and god bless all our police forces for what they go through.

In this case, in my opinion, it was justified, and anyone that thinks it was racial needs to do some serious soul searching. I watched the video many many many times.
Nothing I say will change anyone's mind who feels differently. So..............................................
That's all I have to say about that.
Steve

How about we level the playing field and local police start making folks at the square, sitting in their golf carts, blow into a breathalyzer, start handcuffing them...and hauling them off to jail?

And if they resist, in any fashion and start running away?

Just shoot them in the back...and kill them.

After all, obviously some folks think being over the limit, tussling with a cop and then running...should carry a death sentence.

Let's see how fast and magically minds are changed...if that were to start happening. :ho:

"tussling" with a cop
Too funny!
What footage were you watching?

Rumor has it that more info regarding the officers involved...will soon be forthcoming.


Should be interesting. :popcorn:

How dare you bore us with facts, logic and truth. After all, who do you believe the media or your lying eyes?

OK...I can do that.. :D

1. Why did they allow him to drive the car over to park it?

2. Where are the videos showing...

...those things happening, in that order?

And since they had his drivers license AND his car, plus he was running away...where is the justification for killing him? :oops:

I'm not claiming that I've seen everything there is to see, but I haven't personally seen anything...proving that you are correct in your timeline and assertions.

So it would have been better to let him tase the police officer and give him the opportunity to take his gun and shoot him? No thanks. He did the right thing. Moral of the story: when a police officer arrests you and tells you to stop....stop!!! Color has nothing to do with it!!!

You found that funny? I found the part about "running away" way funnier. The visual in my head cracks me up. Maybe I'm wrong and you have a different definition of running. Taking 5 minutes to go 50 feet, with 2 breaks in between, in my opinion, is not running.:1rotfl: I can go at least 100 feet in 5 minutes with only 1 break. Now that's running!

The perp shot the taser twice if anyone cares to watch the video. First shot shows intent to incapacitate an officer, before he ran. Second time is when he fires back at the other officer, again intent. My educated and informative guess is, by the color of the tasers, they were using the two shot X2. The shoot was justified. There will be a lot more on this if people would do some in depth research, instead of just being talking heads.
Steve

I'm sure it was an oversight but you forgot to mention they would also need to overpower two police officers by tossing them around like rag dolls. Then wrestle away one's taser and then try firing that taser at said officers.

How many Villagers are capable of that? I'm wondering how many could even run away..

Ahhhh.....and we all walk with canes.............that's why the cops don't mess!
Steve

:agree:...TOTALLY!

The taser was fired at them twice. Watch the video very carefully please.
Steve