Talk of The Villages Florida - Cop Shoots Man in Atlanta

Talk of The Villages Florida (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/)

- Current Events and News (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/current-events-news-541/)

- - Cop Shoots Man in Atlanta (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/current-events-news-541/cop-shoots-man-atlanta-307749/)

Quote:

Originally Posted by crash (Post 1784417)

Good or bad he does not deserve to be dead for being intoxicated and sleeping in his car.

He's not dead because he was drunk and sleeping in his car. He's dead because he resisted arrest and then grabbed a weapon from the officer

All Atlanta police force should go on strike and walk off the job in till hostile work environment settled.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JIMLUPO77 (Post 1784612)

You missed 75% of the video ………………... Just like cnn !!!!!!

Were you referring to me? If yes, what video are you referring to? If you're referring to the 27 dead, oh yes I have the complete video. I showed that in every class. It's quite long and was on TV as well. And what is the CNN reference? I'm assuming you were not replying to me, therefore, in the future, please link to whom you're replying. It's less confusing.

Why not just comply (and a bit more)

All of these statements concerning this incident, with so many assumptions on the part of the some posters, are rather frightening. I would certainly pray that you would not be on my jury, should I ever be accused of a crime. Facts should be what we base our opinions and comments upon, not suppositions or assumptions. "He was scared", he thought the officer was going to tase him, etc. are assumptions and jumping to conclusions without having all of the known evidence. That's what juries are for - to hear the evidence and render a verdict and prior to that, our statements should be "guarded".

Common sense would lead one to conjecture, however, that a perp, once stopped by police, acts aggressively for one or more reasons: under the influence of drugs, which are affecting "better judgement", an outstanding warrant, which would put him behind bars, once again, for a long time and he deems the risk-versus-reward equation to be in his favor at the time. Most rational individuals, when confronted by armed policemen issuing reasonable orders, choose to comply and sort out the differences in a court of law. I posit that these are not rational individuals and, once a scuffle ensues and the adrenalin flows, all bets are off.

To assert that these unfortunate occurrences, infrequent as they are STATISTICALLY (research your facts) to racism, says more about the biases of the accuser than the person/cop who is being accused. I am not posting to defend cops, nor to condemn a given suspect. I consider myself a seeker of the truth - wherever it leads me. Sometimes it leads to an uncomfortable discovery but, nevertheless, it's the TRUTH. Statistics generally tell the story (although I have a college tome "How To Lie With Statistics" on my shelf, LOL) and, in these cases, "It's an uncomfortable truth but blacks commit crimes at nearly three times the rate that whites do. Blacks commit 36% of the violent crime in the US even though they are only 13% of the population. So … the likelihood of an encounter with the police is significantly greater if you're black AND, if you don't comply with their orders and aggressively resist - BAD things can happen!

It's no more complicated than this and "racism" on the part of police is statistically proven to be insignificant. Like with doctors, bad judgement kills far more often than not.

Fred :spoken:

Quote:

Originally Posted by maggie1 (Post 1784440)

As a former state trooper from Ohio, I agree with your statement. From what I gleen from the newscast covering this incident, the man had fallen asleep in his car while in the take out lane. In my experince I found that the act of resisting arrest usually begins when the offender is being placed in handcuffs - at that point anything can happen, and in this case it did.

There are a number of options the police could have considered taking in this incident that wouldn't have resulted in the man's death. First, if they suspected he was under the influence, but hadn't seen him drive, they could have removed him from the vehicle, had it towed, and called someone to pick him up. As Steve notes, police are allowed to use deadly force only in those instances where deadly force is being used against them, or others. A stun gun doesn't fit that definition. If the officer had been struck by one of the stun gun electrodes, yes he could have become disabled, but don't forget, there was a second officer present, and the stun gun can only be used once.

So, I ask myself what would I have done if I had been faced with this situation? Based on my training on when to use and not use deadly force, my decision would not have resulted in someone dying. I would have known who he is, thus I could pick him up with a warrant later on, I'd have his car impounded, and it wouldn't be released until he gave himself up. What about the stun gun? Well, he might as well be carrying around a box of Q-Tips, because it is no longer of any use as a weapon to be fired at a distance.

I feel badly for the officer, and of course for the decedent as well. The officer was fired immediately, and that is not the way it should have played out. He could have been relieved of duty until all facts were presented, and then suspended/fired depending on the findings. My guess would be that he will be charged criminally, but will probably be found not guilty based on the totality of the circumstances.

Police work is confounding! It involves 80% of boredom, 15% of heart racing interactions, and 5% of adrenaline pumping terror. We must make instantanious decisions that will effect lives on both sides. We are second guessed, we are both admired and despised, but there is one thing that I can say without reservation, we don't start out a work shift looking to kill someone.

Thanks for this common sense approach. I was Military Police while I was in the service many years ago, Many, many years ago. Unless you do the job you have no idea what the stress level can be. People just get stupid sometimes. When I was doing this job things were different then today. I agree with you and would have handled it in the same way. I got his name, his car, I got him. During my years there was more respect for the uniform I wore. Today not so much. I have a son who is now a Police Captain and was glad when he got off of patrolling the streets. I liked his little saying: "Sir, I'm not here to hold court. Tell it to the judge". I would have hoped that he had been in that situation he would have handled as you and I would have. Thanks again for a common sense post. They ae getting fewer and fewer to find. And thanks for your service to the community.

I watched all the videos and I call it murder!

Quote:

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore (Post 1784501)

I, and history, can almost guarantee that if the person had been white...the result would have been totally different.

Thanks for standing up for the underdog. It is a noble pursuit, imho. I don't always agree, however, with whom you identify as the real underdog in each scenario.
Both you and the post you responded to used nearly identical phrases to demonstrate opposite points of view. Imo, the phrase "almost guarantee" is really just a "maybe" or "perhaps", and the the words "would have been totally" should be replaced by "might possibly have been somewhat" different. Any time the word "if" is used the argument, pro or con, pretty much falls apart.
We have all been doing way to much Monday morning and armchair quarterbacking. This incident, like many others of late, are being viewed from many angles, but the points of view we never get to see, the view of the actual participants, we will never really know.
ALL of these horrible occurrences would have avoided "IF" ... there's that word again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr (Post 1784288)

I watched the video of this tonight and what I saw was the cops stopped a car. They felt that the driver was under the influence so they gave him a field sobriety test. It looked to me that they were about to give him a breathalyzer. He grabbed the officers taser and started running. The officer gave chase and at one point the man turned and fired the taser at the officer. The officer returned fire and killed the man.

Was that shooting justified?

The police chief has resigned, the officer has been fired and his partner suspended.

No, he took the breathalyzer, with no issues, but when the police tried to cuff him that’s when the resistance started. The police didn’t get mean or mouthy with him. That’s when he eventually got shot. All this guy had to do is do
what the police wanted, probably pay a fine & maybe a night in jail. This guy got shot over something stupid he did. It’s hard to feel sorry for him like G. Floyd. This guys lawyer is full of S _ _ _ about his defense. Hope the courts don’t suck up to these 2 racist lawyers. Judges & lawyers are scared to death to do anything because they’re afraid what the black community will do.

Dumb!! A simple "yes sir" would have been the peaceful end.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr (Post 1784288)

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoisR (Post 1784451)

Watch it again. The car was already stopped and parked with the man sleeping in it. No law was broken. The man passed the sobriety test and offered to walk to his sister's house down the street. No law was broken. The police then tried to arrest him. For what charge? Sleeping in ones own car after having a few drinks? Interesting how we see the same events differently. Justice for all.

We’ve got eye witness, judge and jury. Case closed.

I wish people would get the words correct. Shootings that end in a person's death, is called a "Homicide". Its not a murder until there is a trial and some one is found guilt.

The COP was totally justified in using his firearm. I figure if everyone can prosecute a COP for murder based on a video, then I can judge a COP with justifiable homicide by a video. If you fight a COP, he is justified in using the amount of force necessary to subdue you, including lethal force IF he fears that his life may be in jeopardy. If you point a weapon at a COP be prepared to be put down....for good. If you swing a bat at a COP he can shoot you. If you point a knife at a COP he can shoot you. If you use a taser on a COP the COP knows that the next step COULD be that while he is paralyzed the perp can take his gun and kill him or someone else. The COP can shoot you. Case closed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by anothersteve (Post 1784289)

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/fo...r-hats-307693/

Steve

Suicide by COP. Cheaper than his purchasing a gun, when he can get someone else to assist him.

Self defense? Always. But shooting in the back, never!

Better to let him escape than to kill him. Human issue.