Danzy wrote: » Hard to convince them that they should let people shoot at them. Easy for you to suggest it, you are probably on much larger wage and never even seen a shot rabbit. Class divide between the activists and the people living with the consequences is driving a lot of this.
lawrencesummers wrote: » Victim blaming so?
weldoninhio wrote: » We have video of him turning, aiming and shooting the taser. An “obsolete” weapon doesn’t fire.
jam_mac_jam wrote: » I don't know if this would even be news if it wasn't for the timing. He fired at them. Ok it wasn't lethal force but its hard for the cop to judge that in the moment. Tragic really that he died for a drink driving charge if he hadn't acted so stupidly. The timing is terrible.
lawrencesummers wrote: » Running away can hardly be called aggressively resisting arrest, report it wrongly so that people won’t object Publicly? Is that what your saying?
lawrencesummers wrote: » Nope. Tasers are not lethal. Even when fired by somebody that’s running and drunk. Anyone that has died in the past by taser is due to cardiac arrest. There are two cops here, if one was hit the other can shoot.
zpehtsfd wrote: » Clickbait media. Massive new audience on these platforms. Times have changed.
lawrencesummers wrote: » Your at odds with the law so.
Danzy wrote: » He pointed it, that was enough, if he hadn't the taser stolen and turned and pointed his finger, that was enough and reasonable justification for shooting him.
Huntergonzo wrote: » First off, it's very unfortunate that a young man has lost his life under these circumstances, it shouldn't have happened. But how stories are reported is very important, if you run this story as 'white cop kills black man who was about to celebrate his young daughter's birthday' it will cause outrage and violence, for eg, a Wendys has been burned down (well done 'protesters') Why not report, 'cop kills man aggressively resisting arrest'. Why the need to stress skin colour in the media unless they're actively trying to cause trouble, but of course the media would never do that!
frag420 wrote: » Fixed your post...
frag420 wrote: » in that case you will have real world facts to back up your claims that he shot a non lethal taser!? Odd that the cops all act like they are in a Steven Segal film though...
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Get shot in the face with one and come back to me, in the hands if trained people they are non lethal. In the hands if a drunk man running and aiming recklessly they can be lethal.
ExMachina1000 wrote: » Holy smokes. I wasnt expecting that comment from you. Respect
Danzy wrote: » Why didn't the violent drunk inform them that he was proceeding to draw and point a non lethal weapon at them and they should trust him now that he wasn't going to kill them.Why didnt the cops inform him they were going to put cuffs on before they did? They knew he had no respect for others, driving a pick up so drunk he couldn't stay awake.He was dropped off at the drive thru, he had not driven there drunk. Why would those working class guys put their life on line for your Suburbia driven policing fantasies?Eh thats their job, its not a secret in police academy that the job is dangerous. They talk all the time about howe noble they are to put their life on the line to protect and serve the community
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » He ran, turned around and aimed a weapon at the officer, justified shooting imo
weldoninhio wrote: » He turned, aimed and shot at a cop. 3 shots is fully justifiable. It’s not Hollywood.
Get Real wrote: » Quite easy to say though. We "know" that now. We've seen the footage. At nighttime, in the dark, if someone stops, turns and points an object at you, it's completely different.
lawrencesummers wrote: » ....a non lethal weapon.
weldoninhio wrote: » He turned, aimed and shot a non lethal and obsolete weapon (as far as we know) at a cop. 3 shots is far from fully justifiable. It’s not Hollywood.
Discodog wrote: » In any civilised country the following driver or the drive through staff would of simply woke him up probably with a toot of their horn. One has to wonder if the staff would of even called the police if he was white. If police can't understand that, if you are threatened you back away, then they shouldn't be in the police. The rule is always to deescalate, calm the situation & talk. But American is totally different. But I doubt that many of the hang em, shoot em & flog em brigade on Boards will agree.
riffmongous wrote: » Not anymore thank god, maybe now some some other person just asleep in a car won't end up being shot
Danzy wrote: » That's how the Courts see it, probably because if a officer goes down the attacker then has a gun and had demonstrated a willingness to use violence. No, if the person tasered goes down, they're is nothing to suggest they'll be finished off. When you point a weapon, anything that looks like a gun at a policeman, add in being demented drunk and already proved to be violent, you will be shot and rightly so. Working class cops shouldn't have to die to indulge middle class activists often ideology driven views that have no evidence or experience to back.
frag420 wrote: » A non lethal weapon according to the US police force... Why use lethal force against non lethal force?
