Police Shooting USA. Rayshard Brooks.

Overheal

Danzy wrote: »

He list of convictions and their nature shows what type of individual he was.

The cops disciplinary record however suggests an angel :rolleyes:

BattleCorp

partyguinness wrote: »

So what if you can't get a licence for it in Ireland? You cannot compare Ireland and US in terms of weapon culture.

There is no way that a taser with a limited 1-3 jolts of electricity is the equivalent of a loaded gun in the hands of a trained marksman. You need to be quite close and steady to work a taser.

Saying he endangered their lives with a taser is a serious case of hair splitting. Cops are issued tasers as a non lethal alternative to guns.

I've already quoted the Fulton County DA where he said that a taser was a deadly weapon just two weeks before Brooks was shot.

As I keep saying, apprehend him later. Bring him to justice and let a Judge throw the book at him.

Nope. Not good enough. Supposing Brooks fcuked off somewhere else and the police couldn't find him?

But he didnt grab the gun...it was the taser. There is a very important distinction and there is no equivalance with a loaded gun. As I said earleir, if he started firing back with a gun then we would not be having this debate.

Doesn't matter that it was the taser that he grabbed. It's still a deadly weapon. You don't think so. But the Fulton County DA does think so. And so does the State of Georgia.

If he had grabbed a handful of rocks and hurled them back at the cops would you share the same opinion that he was armed and dangerous and being shot dead was justified?

Afterall, rocks can be lethal and you will suffer a far worse injury getting a rock to the head than being jolted by a taser.

Yes, I would consider it apt for a cop to defend themselves if someone was throwing rocks at them. Especially if they were assaulting the cops moments earlier.

Spon Farmer

Overheal wrote: »

You don’t know what happened in Roscommon we have no details except a cop responded to a violent call Solo.

You don't that "detail" is accurate either

BattleCorp

Spon Farmer wrote: »

Rolffe "kicked" Brooks but what kind of kick?

Was he kicking him to hurt him or test whether he was moving? A nudge with a foot is a kick.

Did Brosnan actually stand on on top of Brooks or have a foot on his shoulders for some reason? He has not been fired but put on desk duty which I believe is not uncommon after a shooting. I doubt they do that to him if he actually stood on top of Brooks.I mean the full wight of a man on a guy's chest or back? Wouldn't that kill someone?

Someone who is shot and lying on the ground may still have the potential to attack the cops. I've seen videos where someone was shot enough times to kill them and the cops still handcuffed them while they lay dying on the ground.

Until they are proven to be dead, the cop has to assume that they still have the ability to attack them. Especially ones that are armed.

Overheal

NotMOL wrote: »

running away? But stopped to turn aim and aim at officer before firing the weapon

I didn’t see any aim. His shot flew overhead.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Bold Abdu wrote: »

He was shot twice, not 3 times, whilst he himself was shooting a deadly weapon at a cop.


There's a difference between running away and what he actually did. Let's not pretend otherwise.

He was shot at 3 times. Did you listen to the audio on the footage, you can clearly hear 3 shots unloaded in quick succession.

(and a taser is not a deadly weapon - in fact you'll find that's one of the reasons why the cops have one on them)

He was running away. He wasn't approaching the officers while wielding the taser... of course he shouldn't have ran away, and he shouldn't have taken the taser. But drunk people do dumb things... he still didn't deserve to be shot in the back and killed as he ran away.

And in most other civilized nations, this man would still be alive today! He's dead partly because of trigger happy cops, with too much adrenaline and not enough composure or common sense!

Spon Farmer

Overheal wrote: »

I didn’t see any aim. His shot flew overhead.

The fact he missed doesn't make it any better

ToddDameron

Overheal wrote: »

You don’t know what happened in Roscommon we have no details except a cop responded to a violent call Solo.

He was shot with his own gun.

Overheal

Danzy wrote: »

The DA has not received any evidence on this matter the body responsible for investigating and referring evidence on.

Wait till he has a folder of evidence.

When you remove your religious fervour, you are also just a random on an Irish forum.

Why do you lie? Of course the DA has evidence. Why do you suppose you know more than the case than the DA? Jesus wept!

BattleCorp

Overheal wrote: »

I didn’t see any aim. His shot flew overhead.

Doesn't matter that Brooks had a sh1te aim. He fired it at the cops.

Spon Farmer

BattleCorp wrote: »

Someone who is shot and lying on the ground may still have the potential to attack the cops. I've seen videos where someone was shot enough times to kill them and the cops still handcuffed them while they lay dying on the ground.

Until they are proven to be dead, the cop has to assume that they still have the ability to attack them. Especially ones that are armed.

I have not seen any image or video of the kick or the standing on a dead man.

If those accusing the two cops of brutalising a dying man could provide a link or such?

Spon Farmer

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

He was shot at 3 times. Did you listen to the audio on the footage, you can clearly hear 3 shots unloaded in quick succession.

(and a taser is not a deadly weapon - in fact you'll find that's one of the reasons why the cops have one on them)

He was running away. He wasn't approaching the officers while wielding the taser... of course he shouldn't have ran away, and he shouldn't have taken the taser. But drunk people do dumb things... he still didn't deserve to be shot in the back and killed as he ran away.

And in most other civilized nations, this man would still be alive today! He's dead partly because of trigger happy cops, with too much adrenaline and not enough composure or common sense!

A taser is a deadly weapon in Georgia apparently.

Witcher

Overheal wrote: »

You don’t know what happened in Roscommon we have no details except a cop responded to a violent call Solo.

The Garda was not responding to a call.

BattleCorp

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

He was shot at 3 times. Did you listen to the audio on the footage, you can clearly hear 3 shots unloaded in quick succession.

Brooks wasn't shot 3 times. He was shot twice. One shot missed and hit a nearby car.

(and a taser is not a deadly weapon - in fact you'll find that's one of the reasons why the cops have one on them)

They are still a deadly weapon. As was confirmed by the Fulton County DA two weeks before this incident. They are less deadly than a gun, but still considered a deadly weapon by the State of Georgia.

He was running away. He wasn't approaching the officers while wielding the taser... of course he shouldn't have ran away, and he shouldn't have taken the taser. But drunk people do dumb things... he still didn't deserve to be shot in the back and killed as he ran away.

Nope, he shouldn't have run away. He should have complied with the police officers when they were arresting him.

He shot at the cops with the taser while he was running away. Luckily he missed. The cops were defending themselves by not letting him have the opportunity to do that again.

Agreed. He was drunk and did a dumb thing.

And in most other civilized nations, this man would still be alive today! He's dead partly because of trigger happy cops, with too much adrenaline and not enough composure or common sense!

If Brooks acted in a civilised way, he would be alive today. He chose to drive while drunk, he chose to resist arrest, he chose to assault two police officers, he chose to steal a police taser and he chose to shoot it at the cops.

partyguinness

BattleCorp wrote: »

I've already quoted the Fulton County DA where he said that a taser was a deadly weapon just two weeks before Brooks was shot.

It is not the same or as lethal as a loaded gun that is why it is issued to the police as a non lethal method of apprehending a suspect.

I don't have any stats to hand but I am quite sure that many more people die from police gun fire than from taser deployment.

Afterall the police are supposed to be better than some piss head running off into the darkness.

BattleCorp wrote: »

Nope. Not good enough. Supposing Brooks fcuked off somewhere else and the police couldn't find him?

So he is 'on the run' and warrant is issued for his arrest. That is pretty standard procedure around the world.

Thankfully you are the small minority and the overwhelming of police forces around the world would adopt that approach

BattleCorp wrote: »

Doesn't matter that it was the taser that he grabbed. It's still a deadly weapon. You don't think so. But the Fulton County DA does think so. And so does the State of Georgia.

So the fact he grabbed a taser rather than loaded gun is of no relevance. Right you are.

I suppose the only reason the cop was fired from his job then was just to appease the mob.

BattleCorp wrote: »

Yes, I would consider it apt for a cop to defend themselves if someone was throwing rocks at them. Especially if they were assaulting the cops moments earlier.

You are now moving from defending to punishment. It is not the role of the police to punish suspects.

ToddDameron

Witcher wrote: »

The Garda was not responding to a call.

Indeed. Described as a random encounter resulting with him being shot with his own gun.

BattleCorp

Spon Farmer wrote: »

I have not seen any image or video of the kick or the standing on a dead man.

If those accusing the two cops of brutalising a dying man could provide a link or such?

I think that did happen to be fair. I think they have bodycam footage of that. That's why the second cop (the one who didn't shoot) is being charged with felony assault. Because there's absolutely nothing in the footage that has been released so far to show the second cop did anything wrong.

Again though, there may have been justification for it.

I can understand why someone might stand on someone who they had just shot....... to make sure the person wasn't still in a position to attack them.

weldoninhio

Spon Farmer wrote: »

The fact he missed doesn't make it any better

Maybe Brooks was firing a "warning shot".

Overheal

Danzy wrote: »

There is a recording from 2 weeks ago where DA Howard is saying how a Taser is a deadly weapon.

Lol.

That will be played at the trial, if it gets that far,

As has already been stated in this thread jurisprudence is that in any single case it is up to the jury to determine whether a weapon is deadly or not in the context of a case - the ruling from the Georgia Supreme Court:

Whether a weapon is deadly or one likely to cause serious bodily injury is a question for the jury, which may consider all the circumstances surrounding the weapon and the manner in which it was used. Williams v. State, 127 Ga.App. 386(1), 193 S.E.2d 633 (1972). See also Arnett v. State, 245 Ga. 470(3), 265 S.E.2d 771 (1980). Cf. Smith v. Hardrick, 266 Ga. 54(2), 464 S.E.2d 198 (1995)

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

BattleCorp wrote: »

Doesn't matter that Brooks had a sh1te aim. He fired it at the cops.

He was drunk. You could clearly see he did not have his fully faculties when being interviewed minutes earlier... he was making poor decisions.

The cop that shot him, however, was sober and should have been much more in control of himself and the situation. They let a drunk man take control of the situation, and then compounded this ridiculous scenario losing their sh!t and completely overreacting by killing a man who was running away with a piece of plastic in his hand!

Anyone who thinks this was an appropriate response to the situation, frankly needs to go and have a sit down... because some of you guys clearly don't have your full faculties either!

Overheal

Talia High Ledge wrote: »

wow. Just actually watched it. I thought he must have been in a drive thru queue or something, not just asleep in the car.
He was very polite and even likeable until they tried to cuff him. His reaction at that point seemed more panicked than anything else. 100% clear that he was trying to run away not attack. Even looked very much like he was already tazed when they shot him.

And then the officer said “I got him” - then proceeded to kick him while he was already bleeding out on the ground.

Spon Farmer

BattleCorp wrote: »

I think that did happen to be fair. I think they have bodycam footage of that. That's why the second cop (the one who didn't shoot) is being charged with felony assault. Because there's absolutely nothing in the footage that has been released so far to show the second cop did anything wrong.

Again though, there may have been justification for it.

I can understand why someone might stand on someone who they had just shot....... to make sure the person wasn't still in a position to attack them.

Sorry my post wasn't sarcasm.

I really did mean I can't anything photo or such about the kick, etc.

And really did want those talking about to actually provide the images.

Spon Farmer

weldoninhio wrote: »

Maybe Brooks was firing a "warning shot".

I would think the arse kicking they got was sufficient warning

Overheal

Rodin wrote: »

Oh don't be bringing in the fact that other blacks kill far and away more blacks than white police.

You might get accused of being racist.

It is racist. It has no bearing on this case. It’s mentioned to smear all blacks as a monolithic bloc of murderers.

BattleCorp

partyguinness wrote: »

It is not the same or as lethal as a loaded gun that is why it is issued to the police as a non lethal method of apprehending a suspect.

It's not the same, but it's still deadly. He had the potential to immobilise the cop and steal his service weapon. That's a valid fear for the cop seeing as Brooks had already stolen the taser and shown that he wasn't afraid to use it on the cops.

I don't have any stats to hand but I am quite sure that many more people die from police gun fire than from taser deployment.

You are 100% correct here. Many more people die from gun fire than from taser deployment. That's not relevant here though. It's still a deadly weapon.

Afterall the police are supposed to be better than some piss head running off into the darkness.

Aren't police supposed to apprehend criminals, even when they are in the act of committing a crime. Some people are making out that Brooks was falling around drunk. I don't know how much he had to drink but he was well able to overpower the two cops and take their taser.

So he is 'on the run' and warrant is issued for his arrest. That is pretty standard procedure around the world.

Let him get away with a police taser that he had seconds earlier used on the police. Nope.

Thankfully you are the small minority and the overwhelming of police forces around the world would adopt that approach

I think quite a few police forces would react the same way for assaulting them, stealing their taser and shooting it at them.

So the fact he grabbed a taser rather than loaded gun is of no relevance. Right you are.

It's still a deadly weapon. Assault a cop with a deadly weapon, any kind of weapon and the cop should be allowed to defend themselves.

If it was a chair, golf club, tennis racket, iron bar, or a concrete block doesn't matter. It's assault with something that can cause harm so the cop should be allowed to defend themselves.

I suppose the only reason the cop was fired from his job then was just to appease the mob.

Given the racially charged atmosphere at the moment, I suspect so. I'm thinking that the charges will be dropped or he will be found not guilty. Time will tell.

Look, I could be 100% wrong. I don't think I am. I'm putting forward reasons why I think I am right. If he's found guilty after a FAIR trial, I'll accept that.

You are now moving from defending to punishment. It is not the role of the police to punish suspects.

I never said anything of the sort. I'm not happy that Brooks was killed. I would have preferred if there was another outcome but I still feel that the cop was justified in shooting Brooks to defend himself. On this we disagree, but it's a free country.

Spon Farmer

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

He was drunk. You could clearly see he did not have his fully faculties when being interviewed minutes earlier... he was making poor decisions.

The cop that shot him, however, was sober and should have been much more in control of himself and the situation. They let a drunk man take control of the situation, and then compounded this ridiculous scenario losing their sh!t and completely overreacting by killing a man who was running away with a piece of plastic in his hand!

Anyone who thinks this was an appropriate response to the situation, frankly needs to go and have a sit down... because some of you guys clearly don't have your full faculties either!

He had enough "control of his faculties" to wrestle two grown men onto the ground, toss one like a rag doll and grab a weapon.

BattleCorp

Spon Farmer wrote: »

Sorry my post wasn't sarcasm.

I really did mean I can't anything photo or such about the kick, etc.

And really did want those talking about to actually provide the images.

I'd like to see the full footage too. Then I could be either corrected or 100% sure that my views are correct.

Until then nobody here knows exactly what happened.

Overheal

Spon Farmer wrote: »

All three bullets hit a car?

One did. It only takes 1 to kill. The other 2 hit the man in his back. And then for good measure he kicked Brooks after he was already dying.

Imagine had a bystander been shot and killed and this hothead his kicking this man instead of rendering any aid.

Gross misconduct is not even in question here.

Overheal

Spon Farmer wrote: »

You don't that "detail" is accurate either

That’s what the Irish journalism told me earlier ITT so if your papers suck don’t link to them?

Overheal

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

He was drunk. You could clearly see he did not have his fully faculties when being interviewed minutes earlier... he was making poor decisions.

The cop that shot him, however, was sober and should have been much more in control of himself and the situation. They let a drunk man take control of the situation, and then compounded this ridiculous scenario losing their sh!t and completely overreacting by killing a man who was running away with a piece of plastic in his hand!

Anyone who thinks this was an appropriate response to the situation, frankly needs to go and have a sit down... because some of you guys clearly don't have your full faculties either!

I wonder what would happen if they came across an off duty cop who went psycho and reacted like Brooks did. Would they still shoot to kill? My hole.