Let's Start A Riot?!?!

I'm not an attorney nor do I play one on TV, but all my TV Law experience says if that was the prosecutor saying that in court, I'd object for the defendant. =P

It's not left vs right, it's belief driven thinking. Read back over all his previous posts, it's always in "support of the police". Keep going back and he pretty much gives police a pass on anything, even the Floyd killing that started all this mess.

I am a seething hatred for when power and responsibility is abused. Police are entrusted with great power and responsibility, yet when they abuse it they get covered by guys like him. This has led to rampant and wide spread abuse of that power due to virtually no consequence, until now.

If you want to highlight the insanity, just change the word officer for "some guy". Read every report as "some guy" and reason civilians would go to jail for a fraction of the ***Police pull.

Yes but that is his view and opinion. If you look at others in the P&R, some blatantly go along with anything so long as "Orange bad man very orange and very bad, going to jail for X!" and they are their own downfall. We don't need to help them look like tools.

officer was reaching for his gun a few meters before he got to the red car. The time between the brooks fired the taser and the officer returning fire was little more than a second. ~ i think its justified, considering brooks was able to overpower both officers and withstand being tasered. I do think there should be an alternate "non-lethal" tool for the officers to use besides a taser because its not 100% effective, and their equipment should be considered the possible life & death situations they're in.

I agree, I just didn't want to be misinterpreted by you or others me saying you act like the "left" so I felt I had to put that in quotes.

Tazer Net! Mounted on top of squad cars, can be voice activated.

Police when suspect fleeing after a failed grapple to subdue: Hey Alexa, Launch the Tazer Net!

Car: Instructions unclear, netting the officers.




Ok silliness aside, yes I agree. I do like that Tazers are there, wish they were more effective.

Lol that was my personal take on the situation. Lots of these incidents happen when "stupid" meets "aggressive police officer". Smart people just avoid the police entirely, and ensure they don't do things that could bring them in the vicinity of a police officer. Police like to plant evidence if they need to bring up their numbers, best avoid them entirely. This isn't be blaming stupid folks, just pointing out why a disproportionate amount of these incidents seem to involved stupid people.

The lawful use of violence is a huge responsibility that should never be trivialized like they have been doing for the past couple of decades. It needs to be reigned in, and honestly the Police have demonstrated they aren't capable of Policing themselves.

Having said this, Sheriffs seem to be doing quite fine. Sheriff's seem to be far more focused on keeping the peace then getting high scores on the war against drugs. That's one of the reasons the residents in my area voted not to form a Police Department and instead keep having the Sheriffs keep jurisdiction. This also happens to be the wealthiest county in the USA.

i cant believe you cant visualize this, or see it in the video, so im going to help you. im going to stop short of when he was shot by about one or two frames because i recognize people might not want to see the man die.

Suspect with undischarged tazer



Cop with partially discharged tazer (these hold two shots for anyone unaware).



Birds eye of the prior scenes



Birds eye of when he turns to shoot (unmarked)


Marked version A of turning to shoot.


Extra marked with stick figures because people somehow think you cant shoot backwards and still be shot in the back???



Unmarked CO2 Discharge of him shooting the tazer


Marked version of him shooting the tazer


Unmarked version of just post shooting tazer, less than half a second later


Marked version


Stopping here, because the next two frames are the cop firing three times in that half a second space, and him hitting the car. If you want to see the actual moment of the shooting youll have to watch it, or take my word. dont need to go getting in trouble for posting snuff.

so now, i have to ask,

1. can you admit, that you were UNEQUIVOCALLY WRONG about the order in which events happend?
2. Can you admit that you were wrong that its impossible to shoot behind yourself while running away?
3. can you admit that the man is STILL POINTING THE TAZER AT THE OFFICER WHEN THE OFFICER PULLS HIS GUN

i have posted you IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE of you being wrong.

oh, forgot to add thatd: its literally in frame by frame second by second time stamped security footage proving my claims to be completely and totally true.

Can you be an adult and own that you were wrong?

Only in your own mind.

All you've done is shown how the police decided to use deadly force against a fleeing man. You've demonstrated the officer wasn't afraid for their own lives and instead just wanted to make sure they didn't let one get away.

Wow lots of caps lock and bolded words again.

i....
i cant even....

are you serious?

Frame by frame proof that you are completely and totally wrong.....

and you still quadruple down? what is your malfunction?

Hide, I am not disagreeing with you, but more how you make your point across now. You don't need to get to insults. That's the way others argue when they have only "orange man bad" syndrome.

Look, one even popped up to say hi to you. Use your energy there.

The minute anyone says that the cop shot an unarmed drunk guy that was running away is the minute there's no point in continuing the discussion. It's the same old BS. If the cop wanted to shoot the guy running away, he would have done it at the beginning. What changed? Oh, he fired a taser at the officer, which he physically took from another officer? He wasn't shot because he was fleeing. He wasn't shot because he was drunk. He was shot when he aimed and fired a taser at the officer.

***like that pisses me off. "Treyvon Martin was shot because he bought tea and skittles." No, he was shot because he came back to attack a man and was beating his head against the concrete.

"Michael Brown was shot because he stole some cigars or whatever it was." No, he was shot because he tried to wrestle a gun away from an officer, discharged the firearm in the struggle, punched him in the eye and breaking his orbital, and then charged back at him with the intention to do more harm.

We are never going to have meaningful conversations when people try to sensationalize everything. Facts are important. The fact that you are intentionally leaving out the most important of circumstances just shows that you already know you're wrong. You don't get to change how something happened.

he quite literally is saying this cop killed him out of malice. i cant help but be angry here. I get that insults arent necessary, but at this point, im dealing with someone so far detached from reality that they might actually be mentally ill, and im losing my temper over it.

When the cop clearly had not even drawn his firearm until the person shot at him. He didnt draw it despite being clubbed in the face with his fists. he didnt draw it despite being beaten in the face with the tazer. He drew it at the last possible second, in response to EXACTLY the situation a cop, SHOULD draw his weapon - a suspect pointing a lethal weapon at the cop.

I get all that. I do. But losing your temper over it won't help you in this case. Not saying I have never done it. I mean have you argued with Vic or others here?? They stonewall and will tell you the sky is "Russian Collusion" when you say it's blue. Heck, there is a Quote Changing zealot that will come after you in your sleep to tell you how you changed someones quotes is evil, then will change your quotes to make you look bad.

My point is, its rough in P&R, may have to get some thicker skin, instead of give more reasons for it to be taken away permanently. Heck I take month long breaks when I know that other side is all riled up on syrup and won't listen to reason.

you're right. i've proved him a lying willfully ignorant bigot already. no need to continue on with this subject any further. i've provided rock solid proof of my correctness, and people will either bury their heads into the sand, or accept it as true.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/vigilantes-threaten-seattles-autonomous-zone-171420184.html

Love the spin in the writing of this article.

I'm not really a snuff film connoisseur, so no. You're correct, I haven't, and based on the still shots that's a much murkier picture.

My points about the tack the prosecution should take re: shot in the back, stand, though. And again, in Atlanta, there is no way this guy gets his job back. He might sue and even win damages, but he will NEVER be an Atlanta cop again.

Reported for not calling it HOTlanta.

So if the cop let the guy get away like everyone keeps suggesting, and that guy ended up killing someone. Does the cop get blamed for that instead of taking the shot?

I realize that I am super white. I'm still not that white.

I honestly have no sympathy for him. He resisted arrest, put countless lives in danger by drunk driving (to the point he was so drunk he passed out) and he armed himself with the intention to harm someone.

No, he gets in trouble for not having the situation under control in the first place, though. Two on one, the guy is drunk, and he still gets the better of you? Shameful.


No one (I hope) is claiming he's an angel. However, is anything you listed a capital crime? The only possibility on that list is the taser, and boy howdy do the cops like to sell us on the idea that it's the non-lethal option (which no one actually believes, because it's not).

This guy should be in jail. He should not be in a morgue. See the distinction?

If he killed someone while drunk driving, that is a grave crime indeed. He was a huge risk to leave him run off. Drunk and extremely aggressive as proved by his actions. He shouldn't have resisted arrest and assaulted two officers. Then he would probably be alive.

Was he just drunk or could he have possibly been on something else? Some drunks are freakishly strong, like they are suppressed to pain even.

Thought to be honest, in hindsight I am more leaning towards they "should not have shot him" but they should NOT have just let him run away and get tired like others have mentioned.

See my Idea on Tazor Net. :3

LOL funny thing is I got that from an old poster many years ago here. XD I never called it HOTlanta till I saw them do it. XD

its murky because im still framing it; watching the actual video is much clearer to see whats happening.

as for never being a cop again, you are incorrect; if he is found innocent, and did not violate department policy, he can become a cop again. he can specifically sue them for wrongful termination as it is a contractual job.