You're right.
I would have murdered him in cold blood also... for pointing a non-lethal item at me while running away from me.
What was I thinking?
Another black man killed by a cop in Atlanta trying to escape arrest
- Thread starter rafterman
- Start date
I would have murdered him in cold blood also... for pointing a non-lethal item at me while running away from me.
What was I thinking?
Word of advice to you... don't do what he did. Otherwise you'll probably get shot.Prove it wasn't. All you have is wiki.
You are still the one defending the murder of a non-threat, fleeing away from police.
Does that make you feel good about yourself?
Yup, defending himself from a 'threat' that was fleeing away from him.As they say, "don't bring a stolen taser to a gunfight fight". Cop did the right thing by defending himself. No intelligent and rational jury will convict.
The onus is on you to prove that it wasntProve it wasn't
He most definitely was a threatYou are still the one defending the murder of a non-threat, fleeing away from police
Yes it does because I'm always on the side of the truth.Does that make you feel good about yourself?
You are a typical Liberal in that you let your emotions get in the way of proper judgement
He could have stopped, fired off another taser shot which incapacitated the cop, and then he could have tried to take the cop's real gun as well. I think you're gonna have a tough time convincing a potential jury this wasnt a legit shooting
According to wiki its 3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taser
Correct.
Rolfe shot his Taser three times @ Brooks before he switched it to his left hand and pulled out his gun. The taser Brooks had was the same, a three-shot.
That's all you got, eh?Word of advice to you... don't do what he did. You have a good chance of getting shot.
Thought so.
Can't offer anything of substance, so you fall back on defending incompetent policing.
Not a surprise, coming from you.
Maybe you should buy a dictionary and learn what the definition of threat actually means.The onus is on you to prove that it wasnt
He most definitely was a threat
Yes it does because I'm always on the side of the truth.
You are a typical Liberal in that you let your emotions get in the way of proper judgement
He was wielding a non-lethal item, running away from the officers.
Yeah... imminent threat to life or safety.
Maybe in your gammy's basement, but not in the real world.
I explained that already. He could have stopped, fired off another taser shot which incapacitated the cop, and then he could have tried to take the cop's real gun as well. That most definitely constitutes a threeatMaybe you should buy a dictionary and learn what the definition of threat actually means.
He was wielding a non-lethal item, running away from the officers.
Yeah... imminent threat to life or safety.
Maybe in your gammy's basement, but not in the real world
I can tell you're getting mad. Your argument is a weak one, and as you can tell other posters ITT feel the same wayMaybe in your gammy's basement, but not in the real world
Right... so police are now allowed to punish people for "mights" and "could haves".I explained that already. He could have stopped, fired off another taser shot which incapacitated the cop, and then he could have tried to take the cop's real gun as well. That most definitely constitutes a threeat
I can tell you're getting mad. Your argument is a weak one, and as you can tell other posters ITT feel the same way
Got it.
Ok, Minority Report.
name a country in which a civilians can taser police with impunityYou're right.
I would have murdered him in cold blood also... for pointing a non-lethal item at me while running away from me.
What was I thinking?
Explain to me how this civilian tasered a police officer.name a country in which a civilians can taser police with impunity
This is also wrong, because over 1,000 thousand people have died from being shot with tasers:Maybe you should buy a dictionary and learn what the definition of threat actually means.
He was wielding a non-lethal item, running away from the officers.
Yeah... imminent threat to life or safety.
Maybe in your gammy's basement, but not in the real world
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...sers-largest-accounting-to-date-idUSKCN1B21AH
Its rare but it does happen
And people die from shoving socks in their mouths.This is also wrong, because over 1,000 thousand people have died from being shot with tasers:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...sers-largest-accounting-to-date-idUSKCN1B21AH
Its rare but it does happen
Its rare but it does happen.
So according to Philly, socks are a lethal weapon.
Yea, ridiculous for murdering a non-threat who was running away from him.Justified shooting. It's ridiculous that he was fired for doing his job properly.
What is this world coming to?
hmmm, he resisted arrest, stole the cop's stun gun, pointed stun gun at police and ran.....what did he think was gonna happen?
Mob burnt down Wendy's (where they gonna eat now?) and torched other cars in parking lot......brilliant lol
I've never understood violently resisting arrest when the other person has a firearm and could choose to kill me with it at any time.
Then again, violent criminals don't behave in ways that make sense to normal people, and that's the danger in handling them.
Looks like it legit shooting to me
I have never heard of that happening, letting. Letting a guy go home and arresting him for DUI a few days later. What if he gets drunk again the next day and kills someone. Then what?
They are going to need better wording on justified use of force. I look at that video and I see a fully justifiable shooting. I can't understand how someone can say it was a bad shooting and I will never be convinced otherwise. I can't see how the fired officer isn't going to make a ton of money on a wrongful dismissal suit. Yet on CNN you have people condemning the shooting and people saying he should be fired. To me, they are going to need to break down every possible scenario (which is virtually impossible) and state whether or not you can shoot. It's only fair for the cops who are only human beings and need some clarity on this issue.
e.g. criminal steals your taser and fires at you-you must not discharge your weapon.
One thing to me is clear...if a criminal is allowed to take your taser and fire it at you and you're not allowed to shoot him, coppers deserve a much greater salary. It is an impossible job right now.
Give me a break! The cop was fired on after struggling to detain a violent man. I'm surprised they didn't put him down after he took one of the stunt guns and aimed at them. The guy got what he deserved for being stupid enough to DUI then fall asleep in the drive through then resist arrest then aim and finally fire a stunt gun at an officer.
He couldve stopped running and turned back towards the officer
At 3:48 in this video we can plainly see that the fleeing man turns and aims the taser at the cop.
Once he did that his fate was sealed.
I agree with all the points that Brandon Tatum is saying here.
If you are being placed under arrest do not resist. This is not a hard concept. Most of these police shootings involve non compliance.
In this case he's running from a DUI? Like why bother? Just take the charge and spend the night in jail.
I think that killing was totally justified. The officer had a duty to arrest that drunk driver and he was defending himself from significant threat.
If officer let this drunk driver go, only for the driver to find another car and run someone over, I say officer should bear responsibility for not doing his job which was to arrest the guy.
If officer received the taser discharge and not responded with his gun fire because he hoped tasers are not deadly or whatever, that must be an exception and not the rule for other officers to follow.
As a rule, you cannot allow civilians taser police without fear of being shot at. Eveybody and their dog would be tasering each other then.
No, let the drunk violent guy who just stole a taser from the police and shot it on the officer to go wonder the streets with that taser. It will be much safer fro everybody. I am pretty sure if he'd simply run away without taking the taser or shooting it, it will be a different story.
Set your cop-block, clocks to awaken y'all this coming Wednesday as:As they say, "don't bring a stolen taser to a gunfight fight". Cop did the right thing by defending himself. No intelligent and rational jury will convict.
The killer cop will be charged by the State of Georgia with manslaughter at the very least, but most likely murder in the 3rd or 2nd degree.
That is what happens when a cop, who was not nor was anyone else under imminent or immediate threat of death or grievous bodily harm, shoots a black man in the back from 8 - 10 feet away and kills him.
That is what happens.
Suck it up ..... I know it don't feel good ..... but suck it up.
This is one of your dumbest comments yetAnd people die from shoving socks in their mouths.
Its rare but it does happen.
So according to Philly, socks are a lethal weapon
While running away with another cop right there? More importantly, HE DIDN'T.And what if he and successully tasered the cop and taken his gun??
Not in the same class as Floyd's murder but still horrible police work.
Why?This is one of your dumbest comments yet
Cuz it completely blows apart your argument?
Thought so.
Seriously.While running away with another cop right there? More importantly, HE DIDN'T.
Not in the same class as Floyd's murder but still horrible police work.
Losers like Philly are so scared that they want police to punish people for things that they MIGHT do.
Hello Minority Report.
