[charlieo1126@gmail.com]

When you shoot someone twice in back it’s murder you can go 123 or manslaughter but it’s murder

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by charlieo1126@gmail.com

When you shoot someone twice in back it’s murder

nope

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by charlieo1126@gmail.com

When you shoot someone twice in back it’s murder you can go 123 or manslaughter but it’s murder

When the officer decided he had to shoot and started to pull the trigger do not think his back was to him.

However do think that would tell us whether it was the officer protecting himself or his partner or murder.

Why this rush to judgment?

[BHWitcher]

Someone who has watched numerous black men killed by police. It was a stun gun!! Shot him in the leg no need to kill him!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Byte1

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.

He had NO, ZERO, NADA chance of making it to his car. It was in the opposite direction. He was so drunk and having a panic attack because he could visualize the possibility of the Police putting a knee on his neck after they cuffed him. He saw MR Floyd get MURDERED. The Atlanta man WAS "a frightened sheep" at that moment. His adrenaline would have run ou,t if they just pursued him on foot. But that was NOT macho and they FAILED to wrestle him well. So the one officer's reptile brain said "must SHOOT the BLACK escaping convict". What would JESUS have done?

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by TooColdNJ

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.

You go Mr. Cold-----good post!

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

He had NO, ZERO, NADA chance of making it to his car. It was in the opposite direction. He was so drunk and having a panic attack because he could visualize the possibility of the Police putting a knee on his neck after they cuffed him. He saw MR Floyd get MURDERED. The Atlanta man WAS "a frightened sheep" at that moment. His adrenaline would have run ou,t if they just pursued him on foot. But that was NOT macho and they FAILED to wrestle him well.

So the one officer's reptile brain said "must SHOOT the BLACK escaping convict".

What would JESUS have done?

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

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.

My shoulders are pretty big. And Mr. Cold you made me laugh again. Double KUDOS.

[charlieo1126@gmail.com]

Everyone deserves a fair trial and presumed innocent that doesn’t mean the officer shouldn’t be charged , the coroner has said that the bullets entered the back ( of course everything they in the villages is fake news unless it isn’t ) but back , front or side under any rules of any police department , there was no justification for shooting . In 40 something years in 23 countries I have fired a gun at someone , I know a little bit about the subject .

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

You used the plural, yet while running, the taser was only briefly aimed in the general direction of only ONE of the two...then he kept running.

The other cop was standing there watching the murder happen.

I wonder what made the other one decide to not pull his service weapon...and try to kill the runner too?

Better training?


Less emotional?

Smarter about what the actual situation was?

???

It wasn't murder. Homicide or even Manslaughter maybe, but until one proves intent it's not murder.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by charlieo1126@gmail.com

Everyone deserves a fair trial and presumed innocent that doesn’t mean the officer shouldn’t be charged , the coroner has said that the bullets entered the back ( of course everything they in the villages is fake news unless it isn’t ) but back , front or side under any rules of any police department , there was no justification for shooting . In 40 something years in 23 countries I have fired a gun at someone , I know a little bit about the subject .

???????????

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

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.

OK. My humble solution to-perp has a taser. Good solution....shoot him in leg with lead bullet or bullets. Better solution.....shot him in frontal area with HIGH powered rubber bullets. Have TWO holsters....right or major hand has weapon loaded with lead bullets. Holster at OTHER hand loaded with High Powered rubber bullets (not the whimpy air-powered crowd control rubber bullets). Officer decides quickly which pistol to draw depending on his fear of harm to himself. BEST solution.....911 sends social workers with bullet resistant vests to that kind of situation. P. S. that is what is meant by DIVERTING Police funds.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

He had NO, ZERO, NADA chance of making it to his car. It was in the opposite direction. He was so drunk and having a panic attack because he could visualize the possibility of the Police putting a knee on his neck after they cuffed him. He saw MR Floyd get MURDERED. The Atlanta man WAS "a frightened sheep" at that moment. His adrenaline would have run ou,t if they just pursued him on foot. But that was NOT macho and they FAILED to wrestle him well. So the one officer's reptile brain said "must SHOOT the BLACK escaping convict". What would JESUS have done?

Mind reader? "Frightened sheep?" He took on two trained police officers and got the better of them, knowing they had firearms; frightened? So, this COP is a racist solely because he shot a black man? The suspect was not a "convict" so I doubt the COP had that thought in mind at the time. Biased thinking might demean an officer by labeling him a "reptile" but some of us respect law enforcement and take offense. Shameful?

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

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.

Your account was much more detailed than any I have seen on TV. Knowledge is power. Thanks, KUDOS.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by charlieo1126@gmail.com

When you shoot someone twice in back it’s murder you can go 123 or manslaughter but it’s murder

Not true. Homicide, but only Murder when intent is proven in court. He was firing over his shoulder, the COP returned fire at the same time. I saw the videos, two or three of them. It was a judgement call and now the authorities that be will determine if it was a justifiable shooting. If no intent is proven then the worst that can be convicted of is Manslaughter. We might as well do away with the court system if the media is the judge and jury.