Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Police Shooting USA. Rayshard Brooks.

Options
1…3536384041…85

Comments

  • Options
    #1112
    AbusesToilets
    Registered Users Posts: 10,495 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    Happyilylost wrote: »
    He didn't have a pistol though. The officer knew what he had. The if's and but's only muddy the water. He fired off a taser and continued to run. Was shot in the back twice. With one bullet missing. Any other narrative is subjective.

    As had been explained at length, the police are allowed to respond with more than the force they receive. The suspect escalated the encounter to deadly force when he attacked and took the razer, and shot at the officers. End of.

    This nonsense about turning their back making someone immune from getting shot is ridiculous. He clearly turned to shoot at the officer again, that's the point he left them with no other recourse.


  • Options
    #1113
    AbusesToilets
    Registered Users Posts: 10,495 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    iebamm2580 wrote: »
    i know its harder to hit the legs but could cops not try instead of the body, as hot to the legs unlikely to be fatal and at least it would make the suspect maybe stop if he saw bullets fly by.

    I'm an continually astounded by the naiveity and idiocy being displayed in this thread as it relates to firearms.

    Jesus wept


  • Options
    #1114
    iebamm2580
    Registered Users Posts: 1,610 ✭✭✭iebamm2580


    AbusesToilets wrote: »
    I'm an continually astounded by the naiveity and idiocy being displayed in this thread as it relates to firearms.

    Jesus wept

    it might surprise you but most people in Ireland are not that familiar with fire arms. what is the problem with my question exactly?


  • Options
    #1115
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,483 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    iebamm2580 wrote: »
    it might surprise you but most people in Ireland are not that familiar with fire arms. what is the problem with my question exactly?

    Without the personal attacks: legs move fast they are slender you can still fight back with an injured leg an artery hit can still kill and a shot but alive perp can sue for the permanent disfigurement.


  • Options
    #1116
    iebamm2580
    Registered Users Posts: 1,610 ✭✭✭iebamm2580


    Overheal wrote: »
    Without the personal attacks: legs move fast they are slender you can still fight back with an injured leg an artery hit can still kill and a shot but alive perp can sue for the permanent disfigurement.

    yeah i get all that but hell of a lot less outrage from a disabled man versus a dead mans family i would imagine.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1117
    yourdeadwright
    Registered Users Posts: 20,772 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    iebamm2580 wrote: »
    i know its harder to hit the legs but could cops not try instead of the body, as hot to the legs unlikely to be fatal and at least it would make the suspect maybe stop if he saw bullets fly by.

    Could the suspect not drink and drive,
    Could the suspect not resist arrest
    Could the suspect not punch the police,
    Could the suspect not steal a taser
    Could the suspect not discharge it at the police,
    Could the suspect not torture his kids

    Its karma in a way, if he had never committed the pervious crime he wouldn't have been so desperate to get away , and would probably still be alive...... to go commit his next crime seen as he was a repeat offender


  • Options
    #1118
    iebamm2580
    Registered Users Posts: 1,610 ✭✭✭iebamm2580


    yourdeadwright wrote: »
    Could the suspect not drink and drive,
    Could the suspect not resist arrest
    Could the suspect not punch the police,
    Could the suspect not steal a taser
    Could the suspect not discharge it at the police,
    Could the suspect not torture his kids

    Its karma in a way, if he had never committed the pervious crime he wouldn't have been so desperate to get away , and would probably still be alive...... to go commit his next crime seen as he was a repeat offender

    agreed was a piece of **** by all accounts


  • Options
    #1119
    AbusesToilets
    Registered Users Posts: 10,495 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    iebamm2580 wrote: »
    it might surprise you but most people in Ireland are not that familiar with fire arms. what is the problem with my question exactly?

    beyond the fact that this has been explained multiple times in the thread already, people who use firearms are trained to shoot to kill, with the highest probability of hitting them IE the torso. that's one of the fundamental rules of using a firearm, don't point your weapon at anything you don't intend to destroy.


  • Options
    #1120
    iebamm2580
    Registered Users Posts: 1,610 ✭✭✭iebamm2580


    AbusesToilets wrote: »
    beyond the fact that this has been explained multiple times in the thread already, people who use firearms are trained to shoot to kill, with the highest probability of hitting them IE the torso. that's one of the fundamental rules of using a firearm, don't point your weapon at anything you don't intend to destroy.

    yeah and you completely missed my point about training them to maybe aim to incapacitate rather than kill in scenario like this.


  • Options
    #1121
    joe40
    Registered Users Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭joe40


    iebamm2580 wrote: »
    i know its harder to hit the legs but could cops not try instead of the body, as hot to the legs unlikely to be fatal and at least it would make the suspect maybe stop if he saw bullets fly by.

    No, every shooting has to be a shoot to kill.

    That is why shots should only be fired if the police officers life is at risk or member of public is at risk.
    Shots should not be fired just to stop someone running away, which happened in this case hence the bullets in the back.

    The victims past has no bearing on whether the shooting is justified or not. The police are not ex judicial executioner's nor do they want to be. The vast majority I think want to apply the law.

    I think this killing was unlawful but caused by panic in a tense situation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1122
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 56,343 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    joe40 wrote: »
    No, every shooting has to be a shoot to kill.

    That is why shots should only be fired if the police officers life is at risk or member of public is at risk.
    Shots should not be fired just to stop someone running away, which happened in this case hence the bullets in the back.

    The victims past has no bearing on whether the shooting is justified or not. The police are not ex judicial executioner's nor do they want to be. The vast majority I think want to apply the law.

    I think this killing was unlawful but caused by panic in a tense situation.

    This is a fair angle for me.....

    I don't know the full details, but someone running away and retreating shouldn't be shot dead, unless it can be proven that they were running away and about to really harm or kill others..

    I do think a kind of panic/urgency and fear set in, resulting in the discharging of the gun.


  • Options
    #1123
    Edgware
    Registered Users Posts: 5,874 ✭✭✭Edgware


    iebamm2580 wrote: »
    yeah and you completely missed my point about training them to maybe aim to incapacitate rather than kill in scenario like this.
    You fire a lethal weapon to kill, none of this " shoot it out of his hand" bull****.
    The 2nd officer had a taser as well which would have done the job.
    Training or lack of it is an issue.


  • Options
    #1124
    Edgware
    Registered Users Posts: 5,874 ✭✭✭Edgware


    joe40 wrote: »
    No, every shooting has to be a shoot to kill.

    That is why shots should only be fired if the police officers life is at risk or member of public is at risk.
    Shots should not be fired just to stop someone running away, which happened in this case hence the bullets in the back.

    The victims past has no bearing on whether the shooting is justified or not. The police are not ex judicial executioner's nor do they want to be. The vast majority I think want to apply the law.

    I think this killing was unlawful but caused by panic in a tense situation.

    On the known facts it is an unlawful killing. But a jury may not necessarily convict


  • Options
    #1125
    mynamejeff
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭mynamejeff


    joe40 wrote: »
    No, every shooting has to be a shoot to kill.

    That is why shots should only be fired if the police officers life is at risk or member of public is at risk.


    The victims past has no bearing on whether the shooting is justified or not. The police are not ex judicial executioner's nor do they want to be. The vast majority I think want to apply the law.

    .

    the polices officers lives were at risk, he was firing back at them not running away ,

    the victims past is very relevant here , the fact that he was on parole and would likely have to go back to jail if arrested may well have incited his choosing to try to fight the police


  • Options
    #1126
    AbusesToilets
    Registered Users Posts: 10,495 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    iebamm2580 wrote: »
    yeah and you completely missed my point about training them to maybe aim to incapacitate rather than kill in scenario like this.

    I'm sure the hollow point 130gr Rd doing ~700ms/sec would just give him a little sting in the leg, instead of shattering bones, shredding arteries and the like.

    *Insert Picard meme*


  • Options
    #1127
    Witcher
    Registered Users Posts: 15,038 ✭✭✭✭Witcher


    iebamm2580 wrote: »
    i know its harder to hit the legs but could cops not try instead of the body, as hot to the legs unlikely to be fatal and at least it would make the suspect maybe stop if he saw bullets fly by.

    'If he saw bullets fly by'

    A bullet...fly...by

    **** me....


  • Options
    #1128
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,483 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    AbusesToilets wrote: »
    I'm sure the hollow point 130gr Rd doing ~700ms/sec would just give him a little sting in the leg, instead of shattering bones, shredding arteries and the like.

    *Insert Picard meme*

    Well there has been arguments about mixing the clip with rubber tips in the front. Not standard but maybe the first 6 bullets should be rubber, harder to kill someone from momentarily scaring you while reaching for the ID you asked them to produce (several instances of that).


  • Options
    #1129
    AbusesToilets
    Registered Users Posts: 10,495 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    Witcher wrote: »
    'If he saw bullets fly by'

    A [I]bullet...fly...by[/I]

    **** me....

    Fly by and hit a bystander. Couldn't make this stuff up


  • Options
    #1130
    punisher5112
    Registered Users Posts: 24,644 ✭✭✭✭punisher5112


    This thread is hilarious, I've gone through so many bags of popcorn now.

    Did he deserve to die that really depends on his intention that night and really depends how it could have gone.
    He only had to comply, nothing else.


  • Options
    #1131
    AbusesToilets
    Registered Users Posts: 10,495 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    Overheal wrote: »
    Well there has been arguments about mixing the clip with rubber tips in the front. Not standard but maybe the first 6 bullets should be rubber, harder to kill someone from momentarily scaring you while reaching for the ID you asked them to produce.

    Cause that's what a cop needs to be thinking about if he has to deal with a life-threatening situation, whether or not the bullet in the chamber is a live one or non-lethal one


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1132
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Happyilylost wrote: »
    Hard to know if those are the sequence of events that would of transpired. I would put it as unlikely. From the video footage:

    Rayshard Brooks was likely facing: DUI, Resisting arresting, assaulting a police officer, disarming a police officer (not sure this is an offence but it likely would of been dimly viewed) and firing a taser gun at a police officer. As stated previously in this thread he had previous convictions and was on parole so the likelihood is he was facing some pretty serious jail time. Narrative about missing birthdays and whatever are irrelevant he wasn't going to be around for them anyway. So plenty of mistakes on the deceased part.

    Police officers. Respond to a call. Wake him up. (should they of asked a potentially drunk person to move a car?) Talk to him for 20 mins. Eventually agrees to a breathalyzer. Fails. Cuffs come out. Police fail to hold him. Police officer disarmed. Poor on both counts. Brooks runs. Police officer follows. Brooks fires taser (I believe) officer fires three fatal shots into his back.

    Murder for me. Biggest thing I'm looking at is after firing the taser Brooks turns and continues to run away from the officer pursuing him. He did not in my eyes pose a substantial threat that lethal force was needed. He could of continued to pursue and threatened to fire (how often do we see in the movies "freeze or I will shoot!!! and yes i understand this is not the movies)

    It looks frightening but the whole point of training is to remain calm under pressure. Even extreme pressure. I don't see from the clips online that lethal force was the only option left. The deceased was probably going to spend the next twenty years in jail. Instead he is where he is.

    Brooks still has the weapon in his hand when shot. He had shown he had bad intentions with the first shot. The taser had 2 more shots in it.


  • Options
    #1133
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    AbusesToilets wrote: »
    I'm an continually astounded by the naiveity and idiocy being displayed in this thread as it relates to firearms.

    Jesus wept

    We are about two pages away from ‘he should have just taken the bullets out of the gun and thrown it at him, knocking him unconscious.’


  • Options
    #1134
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    iebamm2580 wrote: »
    yeah and you completely missed my point about training them to maybe aim to incapacitate rather than kill in scenario like this.

    Oh, maybe less than 2 pages.


  • Options
    #1135
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,844 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    They should've just let him run away and keep the taser. He may not have used it on anyone.


  • Options
    #1136
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,483 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    AbusesToilets wrote: »
    Cause that's what a cop needs to be thinking about if he has to deal with a life-threatening situation, whether or not the bullet in the chamber is a live one or non-lethal one

    They have no problems emptying clips

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXpMzT5yGp8


  • Options
    #1137
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    joe40 wrote: »
    No, every shooting has to be a shoot to kill.

    That is why shots should only be fired if the police officers life is at risk or member of public is at risk.
    Shots should not be fired just to stop someone running away, which happened in this case hence the bullets in the back.

    The victims past has no bearing on whether the shooting is justified or not. The police are not ex judicial executioner's nor do they want to be. The vast majority I think want to apply the law.

    I think this killing was unlawful but caused by panic in a tense situation.

    A taser can cause serious bodily harm.

    The Atlanta Police policy manual, which was most recently updated last week, says that an officer can use deadly force when "He or she reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury and when he or she reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of serious bodily injury to the officer or others."


  • Options
    #1138
    punisher5112
    Registered Users Posts: 24,644 ✭✭✭✭punisher5112


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    We are about two pages away from ‘he should have just taken the bullets out of the gun and thrown it at him, knocking him unconscious.’

    No seriously they needed to give him a big hug and drop him home, collect the taser another day and go home.....


  • Options
    #1139
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Edgware wrote: »
    You fire a lethal weapon to kill, none of this " shoot it out of his hand" bull****.
    The 2nd officer had a taser as well which would have done the job.
    Training or lack of it is an issue.

    The second officers taser was spent.


  • Options
    #1140
    DavidLyons_
    Registered Users Posts: 1,255 ✭✭✭DavidLyons_


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    We are a page of two away from ‘he should have just taken the bullets out of the gun and thrown it at him, knocking him unconscious.’

    I cannot get my head around how anybody can defend Brooks. He was a piece of sh1t who tortured his own children.

    He was shot because he resisted arrest for drink driving, assaulted two police officers and fired a taser at them.

    The cops rightly defended themselves against the violent, drunken criminal. They have the right to expect to get home to their own families at the end of each shift.

    How far gone are some people gone that they would defend this person in order to prove their wokeness (vomits).

    All of the celebrities and media jumping on the bandwagon are a fcuking disgrace.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1141
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Witcher wrote: »
    'If he saw bullets fly by'

    A bullet...fly...by

    **** me....

    Obviously he’d have to enable matrix mode first, but other than that it’s a valid point. Hahahaha


Advertisement