It's because they think they should be allowed to shoot someone, whose name and address they know, they have more than half-an-hour's video footage of and and know is unarmed, who is running away.
That's funny, right?
@goaded who is "they"?
Really? The people who thought they should be allowed to shoot someone, whose name and address they knew, who had more than half-an-hour's video footage of, and knew was unarmed, and who was running away?Those two policemen.
@goaded Do you have any police training or experience?
Why, exactly, yould that matter? They knew he wasn't armed, they'd searched him.
@goaded I would strongly encourage you to read up on the case and the specific charges in OCGA (Official Code of Georgia Annotated) before finalizing your opinion. In the state of Georgia, a taser, which the subject had on him and had deployed at and struck the officer, is akin to a firearm and therefore, by Georgia law, lethal force is a legal response. I sincerely hope a 55 year old man would know to conduct research before forming an opinion. Or are you merely attempting to goad people? Is that your M. O. on here?
It's late, here, so why don't you spend the next eight hours producing anything that backs up any part of that statement, and I'll have a look in the morning.
This man sums it up best. APD SHOOTING EXPLAINEDBefore reading below, remember that officers are afforded the same constitutional rights as citizens, so whether they’re charged for political reasons or not, the facts of the case remain the same until their day in court:In order to understand this situation, you’ve got to set feelings and emotions aside to understand objective reasonableness.So looking at this case, what do we know?A DUI investigation determined that he was too intoxicated to drive. The bodycam showed the officers being overly nice and polite to him the entire time all the way up until the handcuffs were about to go on, as they should’ve been.
As soon as they tried to cuff him, an all out brawl took place. Not just resisting, but punching them in the face and throwing them around.He took one officer’s taser, threw him face first into the asphalt, stood up, and took off._____________So let’s pause there and see where we’re at legally.Charges:DUIObstruction X2 - FelonyBattery on an officer X2Aggravated assault X2 - FelonyStrong Armed Robbery - FelonyAnd believe it or not...Possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime - Felony
Per Georgia Law, a taser is classified as a “less-lethal” FIREARM as they do occasionally cause death.(OCGA 16-11-106)________________These offenses are important because there is a case law called Tennessee v GarnerWhat Tennessee v Garner states is:“When a non-violent felon is ordered to stop and submit to police, ignoring that order does not give rise to a reasonable good-faith belief that the use of deadly force is necessary, UNLESS it has been threatened.”So this goes back to the taser being classified as a firearm that can cause death or great bodily harm.___________So,They foughtHe stole the taserHe got up and ran
The 2nd officer chased after him and tried to use his own taser against him, but he didn’t get a good connection.Brooks then turns, aims the taser at the officer, and fires. Statutorily, this is no different than firing a gun.(The taser that APD carries has 2 cartridges, so Brooks could have potentially shot the officer twice.)The officer dropped his taser from his left hand after it appears he was hit by a barb on the video, draws his sidearm, fires 3 shots, falls against a car in the parking lot and Brooks goes down.Brooks was not only a continuing threat to the officer since he could still fire the taser again, but he also showed and EXTREME desire to get away, with a weapon. So it is not unreasonable to have the fear that he would use that weapon to carjack a motorist sitting in the drive-thru line, take a hostage, or otherwise hurt another innocent party.
What does Georgia Law say about deadly force?OCGA 17-4-20 (b):Sheriffs and peace officers may use deadly force:1.) to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon. (He did)2.) to apprehend a suspected felon who possesses any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury. (He did)3.) to apprehend a suspected felon when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others (He did)4.) to apprehend a suspected felon when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm (He did)The officer only needed one of those requirements, but he had all 4...Now the reason tasers are considered “less-lethal” is because when used appropriately, you are “less likely” to kill someone vs using a gun. But Brooks hasn’t been through the training to know how to avoid certain vulnerable parts of the body, and he doesn’t understand how neuromuscular incapacitation (NMI) works, which makes it MORE likely for him to cause great bodily injury or death than if an officer used it.
And just to support the fact that tasers can and do kill, there is an East Point Officer currently sitting in prison for improperly using a taser and killing a man a few years ago.(Eberhart v Georgia)“He could’ve shot him in the leg!”Right off the top, it is unconstitutional to do so. It is considered cruel and unusual punishment to employ a gun in that manner. Either an officer felt deadly force was necessary, or he should use a lesser response.We could just leave it at that, but that's too much of a cop-out, so let's discuss WHY it has been deemed unconstitutional. For one thing, that's an extremely difficult shot to make. The target is quite narrow, and in continuous motion as the suspect runs away/charges the officer. Under the best of conditions trying to hit the leg is challenging... to be generous about it. But in a life or death encounter, the officer's fine motor skills will be eroded by the stress of the encounter making the shot, turning a leg shot into a very low probability feat.Assuming a round does hit the leg, then what? The only way a shot to the leg would immediately stop a threat is by shattering one of the bones, and stopping the threat is the ultimate goal. While it is very difficult to find a shot to the leg that will immediately stop a threat, it is actually comparatively easy to find shots to the leg which eventually prove fatal. Human legs have very large blood vessels which are essentially unprotected (femoral artery)
Now, remember, we’ve had days to sit back, watch videos, discuss, and analyze this entire thing. The officers had less than a minute from the time the fight started, and less than 5 seconds to interpret EVERYTHING you just read while running, getting shot at with a taser, and returning fire.-Greg JamesFounder/Executive DirectorGeorgia Law Enforcement Organization"
Now, @goaded based on your time in your question, I don't expect you to care that this was laid out for you, but this is the breakdown of the incident and all of the code sections applicable. Perhaps someone else on this site will find this educational.
Why don't we listen to the victim's version of the incident? Oh, right, he was shot twice in the back and his corpse kicked by his totally justified killer. Which of his crimes was a capital offence, exactly?i also note how you pretended to be a completely disinterested commentator,
You could have just linked to www.facebook.com/.../2032856216846463
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
They called in sick, because one of them shot an unarmed guy in the back while he was running away.
Oh so it's like a strike. Well first off Raynard wasn't unarmed he had a taser and pointed it at the cop. The footage was pretty clear. He was absolutely in the right and should not have been fired or even be charged for murder. So I can understand other cops being pissed and decided to call in sick.
Uh, how many times can you fire a Tazer, and is it deadly? If it's deadly, police shouldn't be using them as much as they are, if it's not, it's not a reason for shooting someone.They could have just gone to his house in the morning. The car's details gave the address, they had half an hour of video of him...
@goaded apparently the same DA's office thought tasers were deadly weapons last week or they couldn't have charged the officers that tased the college students with aggravated assault.
Lol ok so let's say he fires and hits the cop. And he takes his pistol. I mean now you have a drunk guy with a gun. Taser might be non lethal but a gun sure isn't. Or let's say the cops let him run away. Well now you have a drunk guy with a taser running on the streets. And who knows what he might do. And you're assuming he's going to run home and just wait to be arrested. I mean if that was the case why resist arrest at all? I mean and we're talking about a guy that has a criminal record. Like no matter how you try to spin it the cop was right.
@Thisperson98 So, if someone shoots at you with a gun that you know only had one bullet left in it, and missed, you'd be entitled to kill them?
@goaded a lot of police tasers have two cartridges on them.
@Thisperson98 And you don't think they can count to two? Could be a defence in court!
@goaded so they should wait until the suspects shoots the taser again?
@Thisperson98 I'm sorry, wasn't it clear? IT HAD ALREADY BEEN USED TWICE!"Howard also revealed that the taser was shot twice and not dangerous once it was in Brooks’s possession, which Rolfe knew."
@goaded I only saw it get deployed once.
@Thisperson98 OK, and now? Should he have killed him (let alone kicked the body)?
@goaded he put his knee on his back to handcuff him. Pointing a weapon at a cop gets you shot. Tasers don't normally kill but when a suspect incapacitates a cop, it can be very dangerous for the officer because the suspect would have access to the officer's gun.
@Thisperson98 The suspect who's details (and car) they had and who had missed with the taser and was running away? Very dangerous.
@goaded cops can't really just let someone run away. Cops are supposed to chase the suspect.
@Thisperson98 Yes, they can. They are supposed to uphold the law, which they could have done by towing the car, and visiting his home in the morning. His crime was sleeping in a car, remember?
@goaded they are also supposed to protect the community. Attacking an officer makes you a threat to the community. So no, letting him go wasn't an option. Also most of the time the suspect doesn't return to their address when they are wanted by the police.
@Thisperson98 No, it made him a temporary threat to the police. What was he going to do, go on a sleep rampage against innocent civilians?
@goaded if the suspect attacks the police they are likely to hurt civilians. Also it is extremely hard to catch someone when they escape from the police.
@goaded hey moron the guy was driving drunk and passed out at the Wendy's drive through. Haven't you seen those commercials about driving drunk and accidents caused by them? Stop trying to defend the guy. He was a scumbag that beats his family so we're all better off without him anyways.
How, exactly was he going to drunk-drive without a car, dumbass? He had a home and a family, he would have been there sooner or later.
You mean after the cops woke him up and he ran? Well he's no longer asleep then now is he? So I don't know what you're even trying to say. You want the cops to just leave the guy alone? You want the cops to knock on his window and then go away? Or maybe hmmm I don't know get the guy off the streets? Oh you know like what they were trying to do when they gave him the sobriety test and he failed. And why do you keep assuming he's going to go home? Seriously the guy was a criminal, he acted out, and now he's dead. Good riddance.
He talked to them for half an hour or more. What was he going to do to random strangers?What, exactly, was he guilty of? Being drunk in charge of a vehicle? Didn't they have proof of that, and who he was? Didn't they have possession of the vehicle? How, exactly, was he going to hurt anyone?He wasn't a danger to anyone, and even if he didn't go home, he would have been charged, whenever he was caught next time.I might be able to see an argument for the death penalty for murder, but not for falling asleep at the wheel while parked.
He drove to Wendy's while being intoxicated... So yes he's guilty for operating a vehicle while drunk. And yes he was asleep, but what if he wakes up 5 min later and starts driving? You might as well say drunk driving should be legal. And you've got to be kidding me driving drunk endangers everyone including himself. The guy was sitting in the driver's seat blocking the drive through...Let me say it again drunk driving endangers everyone. Even tho he was asleep when the cop approached him. If they left him alone it's very easy for him to wake up and drive. And there were cars behind him so I'm pretty sure some of them would have honked until he woke up.
Was he driving away? No.Once he was out of the car, he was no danger.You don't kill people who aren't an immediate danger. How is this difficult to understand?
Yeah cause the cops told him to get out and gave him a sobriety test.After he failed you expect the cops to let him get back in the car and drive away? The guy punched the cop and stole his taser. Does the guy need to start killing people before the cops actually do something? It's the same thing when cops tell people to put their hands up. And some are stupid enough to reach in their pocket. Like hey the guy wasn't an immediate danger to anyone. And let's say he didn't have any type of weapon on his person either. But the cops fire you know why? Cause they didn't cooperate and they don't know if they are reaching for a gun. Brooks resisted and showed signs of aggression. You don't wait until you're in immediate danger to do something about it. That's just stupid.
The point here is that they absolutely, completely, 100% for sure, definitely knew he wasn't pulling a gun. They had just searched him minutes ago.
Lol no... My point is you don't wait until you're in danger to start reacting. You don't wait for the criminal to shoot you first and then you do something about it. That's just stupid.
In general, you're not wrong, but *in this case* they knew perfectly well that they weren't in any danger whatsoever.They'd searched him, they knew exactly who he was, they had over half an hour of video of him, they had his car, they knew the taser he'd taken was used up (at least by the time they started shooting). They were perfectly safe (and so was the public) before they shot him in the back.
Did he block you?
@OceanMelon Yup. I guess he's just *too* enlightened for the rest of us. :P
He blocks anyone who disagrees with him, it pathetic
Actually two years ago Atlanta PD was already so short staffed they announced they would not be responding to shoplifting calls... good luck staffing up after this LOL. www.fox5atlanta.com/.../atlanta-police-will-no-longer-respond-to-some-shoplifting-calls
rayshardyes, i get he was loitering, but, it's not like he was a killer
You mean he was drink driving and then fought the cops because he was on probation and didn't want to go back to prison.
no, he was sleeping, in a wendys parking lot, you fucking idiot
The only opinion from girls was selected the Most Helpful Opinion, but you can still contribute by sharing an opinion!