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.
LOL!!! I feel like they're either not watching the same video or they're doing what you're suggesting and going straight from the headline to posting their outrage.
I'm not even a cop fan and even I know they're not ALWAYS wrong.
Of course they had choice.
He didn't kill anyone, he didn't cause any crush - he got out of the car and took breathalyzer test.
They could have easily send him home and charge him later for drunk driving.
I think we watched two different videos may be...
MADD would disagree. Every advocacy program against drunk driving would disagree. They are the ones that made it mandatory to arrest a person who was caught driving drunk. When you catch somebody driving drunk -- especially when they blow more than double the legal limit -- in almost every corner of the USA, you are required to arrest them. It's a big deal. Moving the goalposts around "cuz he's a black guy" is ridiculous. The law doesn't absolve anyone based on their skin color.
I think the police would have rather let the guy go. They don't want to be another "evil cop assassinates blacks because racism" example. But Rayshard Brooks did everything within his power to get himself shot. It's possible that his only mistake was grabbing a taser instead of a gun off of the cops -- which was probably entirely accidental in the heat of the moment more than anything. A tased and unconscious cop can't stop Rayshard from walking over, taking their gun and executing both cops there and then. Can you say with absolute certainty that that wouldn't have happened? You know he's already willing to assault the police. You know that he's willing to grab a weapon off of the police. We now know that the guy has a violent criminal past. Garrett Rolfe has likely been updated on Brooks criminal and violent history by dispatch at this point, so he has every reason to believe that Brooks intended to kill or seriously injure him. Then Brooks points a weapon at him. What do you think is the appropriate response in that moment in time? Let yourself get KO'd by the taser and hope to hell that a know convicted violent felon who just beat the **** out of you and your partner will play nice and just walk away?
One of the best memes I’ve seen in a long time went something like this:
Black man killed by police: but, he had a life of crime behind him.
White man accused of rape: but, he has his whole life ahead of him.
That white man was Bill Clinton
Yeah and the man killed by police had an extensive criminal record. And the man accused of rape was a promising college student who maybe didn't do it. Leave it up to Democrats to make factual and truthful statements condemnable.
MADD would disagree. Every advocacy program against drunk driving would disagree. They are the ones that made it mandatory to arrest a person who was caught driving drunk. When you catch somebody driving drunk -- especially when they blow more than double the legal limit -- in almost every corner of the USA, you are required to arrest them. It's a big deal. Moving the goalposts around "cuz he's a black guy" is ridiculous. The law doesn't absolve anyone based on their skin color.
I think the police would have rather let the guy go. They don't want to be another "evil cop assassinates blacks because racism" example. But Rayshard Brooks did everything within his power to get himself shot. It's possible that his only mistake was grabbing a taser instead of a gun off of the cops -- which was probably entirely accidental in the heat of the moment more than anything. A tased and unconscious cop can't stop Rayshard from walking over, taking their gun and executing both cops there and then. Can you say with absolute certainty that that wouldn't have happened? You know he's already willing to assault the police. You know that he's willing to grab a weapon off of the police. We now know that the guy has a violent criminal past. Garrett Rolfe has likely been updated on Brooks criminal and violent history by dispatch at this point, so he has every reason to believe that Brooks intended to kill or seriously injure him. Then Brooks points a weapon at him. What do you think is the appropriate response in that moment in time? Let yourself get KO'd by the taser and hope to hell that a know convicted violent felon who just beat the **** out of you and your partner will play nice and just walk away?
Did not blow double the limit. More like one drink over. And that is not enough normally to cause one to fall asleep. So it be interesting to see if there was something else going on. And he apparently fell asleep after parking the car and the officer had to wake him again.
MADD would disagree. Every advocacy program against drunk driving would disagree. They are the ones that made it mandatory to arrest a person who was caught driving drunk. When you catch somebody driving drunk -- especially when they blow more than double the legal limit -- in almost every corner of the USA, you are required to arrest them. It's a big deal. Moving the goalposts around "cuz he's a black guy" is ridiculous. The law doesn't absolve anyone based on their skin color.
I think the police would have rather let the guy go. They don't want to be another "evil cop assassinates blacks because racism" example. But Rayshard Brooks did everything within his power to get himself shot. It's possible that his only mistake was grabbing a taser instead of a gun off of the cops -- which was probably entirely accidental in the heat of the moment more than anything. A tased and unconscious cop can't stop Rayshard from walking over, taking their gun and executing both cops there and then. Can you say with absolute certainty that that wouldn't have happened? You know he's already willing to assault the police. You know that he's willing to grab a weapon off of the police. We now know that the guy has a violent criminal past. Garrett Rolfe has likely been updated on Brooks criminal and violent history by dispatch at this point, so he has every reason to believe that Brooks intended to kill or seriously injure him. Then Brooks points a weapon at him. What do you think is the appropriate response in that moment in time? Let yourself get KO'd by the taser and hope to hell that a know convicted violent felon who just beat the **** out of you and your partner will play nice and just walk away?
It seems that most, maybe all of these innocent black man stories involve law breakers. Not a single one that I can recall mentions a completely lawful man. Says a lot.....
Drunk driver, possibly high on narcotics too, who was passed out cold in a drive thru, who was jumping curves to park his car away from the drive thru...... And liberals want police to escort him home and charge him later?
Hahaha! Seriously, wth is wrong with you people?
The Dem's are severely brainwashed by CNN... who tells them "all cops are bad and they want to kill you" Thus, this is why you see a backwards country developing before your very eyes...
So tiresome. When you fight the police, steal their Taser, and run away while pointing the stolen Taser at the police, whatever happens next is on you.
Since Democrats say it's okay to steal a police officers taser, and try to use it on the officer, I can only hope Dem's get a taser fired in their gut and see how terrible it feels. This seems fair
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.
