Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The suspect fired the tazer gun at the officer, as seen in the video footage. Tazer guns can immobilize people. What if the officer had been tazzed and the suspect stole the officer's gun while he was immobilized? He could have easily killed the officer. If the suspect was white there would be no protests and the officer would not have been fired.
Yeah, no jury is convicting the officer on this, there's enough grey involved
He'll also be getting a big settlement too for unlawful termination
This is what can happen when a perpetrator such as this drunk driver resists arrest and fights police officers. It's unfortunate but that's the way it is
It seems to me that there is a power struggle and the police want to 'dominate'.
There is a difference in trying to make a community safe and making sure you dominate.
I will say, we don't know the whole story...but based on some of the info. floating around....if this guy was asleep in his car, the biggest threat was if he was in fact drunk and would think about driving. They got him out of the car...that was a good thing. They were talking to him. AT that point all they needed was his keys -- if they were in a battle for his keys and the guy wasn't cooperating. Call the tow truck and impound the vehicle...let the guy sober up before he picks it up.
I know it is a DUI if you are sleeping in your car....but sometimes you make a judgement call.
Sometimes you avoid unneccessary power struggles.
AS I said -- my version is based on what we think we know -- not what we know.
So you come across a drunk driver you let him go and impound the car? You're not arresting him? On what authority are you taking possession of his property? You can't take someones car without the legal authority to do it. Just let him go but take his property away from him for no reason? LMAO ..............
That's stealing. Where do you people come up with this garbage? Truly amazing what nonsense people write here. LMAO
X26 taser has a thumb manual safety. The little light activates when you turn off safety
So did the suspect deploy the taser? He would have to have known about the thumb safety. Or could the thumb safety have already been de-activated when he took it form the officer? There did appear to be a light on the taser in the video.
He had the taser and the INTENT to inflict violence when he fought the cops and disarmed (taser) one of them. It is reasonable to believe that he will take the gun from the cop after he demobilised him with the taser
True, but a defense attorney (you know how they are) will say "but did he, but did he, but did he??" They will plant that seed in the jury's head 100 percent.
Quote:
Also, the cops did not have the opportunity to pat him down for weapon prior to the fight. The taser makes a very loud pop when deploys, and taser looks like a gun, and it was a split second decision at night time.
The man had a taser that was all. Tasers don't kill people just ask the police. The man was running and did aim the taser in the direction of the police, but it is also clear that the possibility of the man hitting one of those police was astronomical. The officer then fired three rounds bringing the man down. Wasn't one enough? Why wasn't Brooks shot in the leg?
I have heard it more than once in the south, "I just gotta go kill me somethin'." That seems to the motto of all police when dealing with black people.
Secondly, what does this incident say about the capability of police when two sober white police officers were unable to apprehend one blackman? It is clear that both police officers should be terminated for incompetence if nothing else.
The man had a taser that was all. Tasers don't kill people just ask the police.
the problem is there was a gun, and guns do kill. If the taser incapacitated officer Rolfe the next step was the suspect grabbing the gun and finishing him off. The officer made a split second decision which the circumstances allowed for.
All this doesn't happen by the way if the drunk driver complies with the police
The poster you responded to actually thinks that a guy who beat up one cop and stole a taser from another cop, after being busted for drunk driving, ought to be let go, because he’ll show up to get his car and pay a fine ... eventually. I CANT BELIEVE PEOPLE THINK THIS WAY.
I'm sitting here shaking my damn head, although it's always the usual suspects who arrive at these conclusions.
Lots of information out there and I'm going to keep listening until I find the version I like. Then when irrefutable video is released, then it's, I'm sticking to my opinion. They should have just let him go home.
After a DUI?! Are we giving a pass to people now when they've driven so impaired that they've fallen asleep in a fast food drive through?
What do you want to bet the folks posting this pap live in quiet little towns and suburbs and not a major city.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Rayshard Brooks is not another George Floyd
