Overheal wrote: » What does blackness or being an alleged child abuser have to do with it
iebamm2580 wrote: » what if they let him run off and he uses the taser on some innocent passerby, would that be ok?
yourdeadwright wrote: » So man with numerous other convictions including Torture of children, Drink drives, Police try to arresst him peaceful, he attacks them steal a taser and tries to use it on the police, ,I mentioned his previous as it shows he can not be trusted and liable to do anything, In the video he went from calm to nuts in the blink of the eye, The police where right to take no chances when he had a weapon and proved he was willing to use it His own actions caused His own death
Overheal wrote: » No that would be assault and more charges for him. What an odd question.
Danzy wrote: » He was convicted so not alleged. There are people saying he was shot because he was black, MSNBC made him sound like a saint who was shot unarmed. He was shot because he pointed a weapon at police, nothing else. The Mayor should be shaking their hands but instead it is the opposite.
iebamm2580 wrote: » Odd question to you, cops are there to protect the public if they let him run off with the taser he was a danger to the public, keep up.
punisher5112 wrote: » I would have treated the situation the same. He already showed he was a threat.
Overheal wrote: » The public has been very vocal in objecting to the use of excessive force so square that up
Overheal wrote: » His standing convictions are irrelevant to the moment in hand, at the point he chose to resist arrest and wrestle the police all that matters is detaining the perp with the least continuum of force possible so justice for resisting arrest and stealing a weapon is meted out in court not splattered across the pavement.
Overheal wrote: » Glad you wouldn’t pass the psychological evaluation in many academies.
yourdeadwright wrote: » The cops would have know he had priors or had just done something from his reactionto a simple traffic stop that would have make them more inclined to take no chances when he got there weapon
iebamm2580 wrote: » Im sure they wouldnt like some drunk career criminal running around with a cop taser, tasers have killed people before.
Danzy wrote: » While he was exceptionally bad, his actions that night alone ensured his death.
Danzy wrote: » His history just means we can be glad his family and community are now safer. It doesn't change the justification, pity he didn't want to go to court, his choice.
Overheal wrote: » Yes when cops used them. And even then it requires assault with the taser lasting quite a while, generally officers who murdered someone electrified their victims multiple times for extended durations. He wasn’t aiming it at any bystander. He was fleeing when he fired off a wild drunken shot behind him, which missed, and even if it had hit the probability of piercing a barb through a police uniform is low, and both barbs need to make the circuit. You can ward off a taser with thick pants and a hoodie nevermind a bullet proof vest.
Overheal wrote: » Cops choice ultimately.
Danzy wrote: » Why didn't those working class people let the violent drunk shoot at them, didn't they know the outrage it would cause among rich white people.
I Am Nobody wrote: » Just curious after reading up on this event.But why didn't the other officer deploy his taser,since the other officer's one was taken?I know hindsight and all,but surely that other officer would have considered it instead of allowing him to be shot in the back.Or am I confused on the situation?
Overheal wrote: » Their choice, rich white people pay their bills.
Danzy wrote: » Doesn't mean that they are expandable. Their lives secondary to the latest social concerns of the bourgeoisie.
Odhinn wrote: » So you're saying that there isn't a problem with police violence?
lawrencesummers wrote: » Apparently he wasn’t driving, he was asleep in the parking lot. Nobody says a taser isn’t a weapon, but the cops say it’s a non lethal weapon.
