Defunding the Police - disbanding them

[Interceptor]

Here it is in a nutshell. It is scary that most of them have come true or are in progress.

Thanks for posting link

Sponsored

 

[Kong76]

Thanks for the tip. I just put my life savings into Uhaul stock. Gonna go thru the roof when a lot of African Americans in other states decide to move there.

And people like me moving out. I made up my mind to leave Ca several years ago based off of the taxes, executive orders, with Dems having a majority passing any laws they want etc. Also not being able to modify our cars due to CARB. I have to wait till my son graduates high school. I have been through 27 states, lived in Maryland for a year. There are a lot of beautiful states out there.

I'll miss the weather and that's it. I am pretty conservative so no worries of me changing the state I move to.

 

[lateinthegame]

And people like me moving out. I made up my mind to leave Ca several years ago based off of the taxes, executive orders, with Dems having a majority passing any laws they want etc. Also not being able to modify our cars due to CARB.

I'll miss the weather and that's it. I am pretty conservative so no worries of me changing the state I move to.

I do love Ca and I think it is one of the best states to live in. They have the beach, mountains, desert, ocean, trees....beautiful. Just the laws are not the best.

 

[lateinthegame]

After seeing the Atlanta shooting it made me sick. Why would you shoot someone in the back running away. Let him go. You have his car and pick him up later. It is like Rambo all over again. They have to make a rule, I thought there was one already, that you CAN"T!!!! shoot someone in the back. Even in the Old West that was murder. Didn't these guys watch Gunsmoke or Bonanza?

 

[shogun32]

It just sounds like Welfare that they already get.

which by some calculations is already past 5 Trillion dollars. And all we got for that is more welfare and social degeneracy. Maybe we should stop going to the store to buy more welfare. Maybe this time purchase some self-responsibility, personal/individual charity instead...

 

[watisthis]

This is an echo chamber for a lack of critical thinking.

 

[Flimflamman]

After seeing the Atlanta shooting it made me sick. Why would you shoot someone in the back running away. Let him go. You have his car and pick him up later. It is like Rambo all over again. They have to make a rule, I thought there was one already, that you CAN"T!!!! shoot someone in the back. Even in the Old West that was murder. Didn't these guys watch Gunsmoke or Bonanza?

I am not an attorney, this is just my opinion. Maybe a real attorney can chime in and chop me up here. That said...

The reality is the cop (Rolfe), will probably get off relatively easy. Maybe even get to walk away and get his job back, as crazy as that may sound. Or at worst, may get a manslaughter related conviction. That will be appealed... and so on.

He's been with the ATL PD for about 7/8 years, and nothing has surfaced about him having discipline issues (at least not yet). So assuming he has a good record.

IMHO, watching the video, yes he clearly shoots Brooks in the back (as proven by autopsy). That moment took place so fast you can't just flat out call him a murderer. Brooks turns and fires the taser at him and officer Rolfe draws and fires his weapon extremely fast. While tasers aren't considered deadly, they are designed to incapacitate people. The defense will have a very strong rebuttal with that outcome.

All other aspects of the incident aside, if you focus solely on that moment, when Brooks turns and fires the taser, and Rolfe draws and fires his weapon, I think it's a fair to say the officer could have feared for his life during that part of the incident.

Why? Because Brooks already whooped up on their asses prior to that, all the while being tasered who knows how many times. Who's to say, that if that taser shot Brooks takes at Rolfe, even while running away, takes Rolfe down, and he doesn't come back to whoop up on them some more? Maybe even take his service weapon? He already proved he was willing to take the taser... because he did. Circumstantial evidence with that probably.. I dunno.

Like I said earlier, maybe Rolfe should have just let him run off (assuming that is what Brooks would have continued to do). I try to picture myself in that situation, in both peoples shoes (Rolfe and Brooks), and afterwards... I'm thinking, yeah we both ended up making a bad decision.

Did Brooks deserve to get killed? Hell no! Of course not!

Did Rolfe have a right to defend himself at that very moment in time? Yes... but did he overreact? I guess that will ultimately be up to a (grand) jury. And I wouldn't want to be on that jury, TBH.

This incident will certainly be part of police reform in approaching these potential situations.

My condolences to the Brook's family.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

https://reason.com/2020/06/15/was-the-shooting-of-rayshard-brooks-lawful-but-awful/

 

[Interceptor]

When did it become acceptable to shoot someone in the back?
Why was everything calm until the addition officer rolled up?
What caused the change from co-operation to agreesion?

 

[HoosierDaddy]

When did it become acceptable to shoot someone in the back?
Why was everything calm until the addition officer rolled up?
What caused the change from co-operation to agreesion?

Well its been acceptable for POLICE to shoot someone in the back under certain circumstances according to Supreme court rulings: "necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."

So it comes down to did that apply here. He was definitely trying to escape. He had taken a weapon (taser) that has caused the death of ~500 people from an officer. Courts with jurisdiction in that area have ruled that a taser is a deadly weapon when used by a defendant in court cases.

Legally, he may get off based on those facts. It doesn't mean he should have done it. For one, that particular model of taser doesn't appear to be that deadly since the suspect was already hit with (at least one) identical taser of another officer and didn't seem to phase him.

There is plenty of video/audio. I don't see even the slightest clue. Good chance we will never know why he did that. Of course drunk often leads to stupid.

 

[shogun32]

Granted the drunk driver should have submitted to being arrested for DUI (since obviously he did drive from wherever he had been drinking to the Wendy's) but likely thought it was an uncalled for punishment. I would actually agree. Cite him, take his keys till end of shift or just drive him to his sister's place and leave the car in a spot. All would have been zero-conflict and no unnecessary escalation.

I think bigger problem here (aside from the obvious) is the failure of the (2nd?) officer to exercise some situational judgement. Is this yet another side-effect of the "zero tolerance" crap infesting our society where finger-guns or pop-tarts with bites taken out of them are dangerous weapons?

It used to be Officer FRIENDLY, not Officer I'm going to blindly Arrest you for every little stupid thing.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

It used to be Officer FRIENDLY, not Officer I'm going to blindly Arrest you for every little stupid thing.

Again, I am not taking a side on the outcome BUT I don't consider drunk driving a "little stupid thing". He drove there drunk. He appeared drunk, was appropriately given and failed a breathalyzer test. Drunk driving kills lots of people. I would be upset if the police didn't arrest him.

 

[Bikeman315]

Well its been acceptable for POLICE to shoot someone in the back under certain circumstances according to Supreme court rulings: "necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."

So it comes down to did that apply here. He was definitely trying to escape. He had taken a weapon (taser) that has caused the death of ~500 people from an officer. Courts with jurisdiction in that area have ruled that a taser is a deadly weapon when used by a defendant in court cases.

Legally, he may get off based on those facts. It doesn't mean he should have done it. For one, that particular model of taser doesn't appear to be that deadly since the suspect was already hit with (at least one) identical taser of another officer and didn't seem to phase him.

There is plenty of video/audio. I don't see even the slightest clue. Good chance we will never know why he did that.

I am really struggling with this. On one hand we have a dead father of four (I don't care what color he is). On the other hand we have this.

1. He was a 27 year old man with four children. Why the f-ck was he out drinking and driving?
2. Somebody at Wendy's called the police when he fell asleep behind the wheel while in the drive through lane. Overreaction maybe but it started the wheels in motion.
3. OK, police arrive, have him move his car and start talking to him. All is well.
4. Still talking. Breathalyzer test, fails. Officer decides to place man under arrest as allowed by law in Georgia.
5. As soon as the cuffs come out the man starts to resist and continues to fight with the officers. WHY???? What the hell was he thinking? You knew right there this wasn't going to end well.
6. The fight escalates. the man take the taser from the officer. WHAT? Are you kidding me. Is this father of four suicidal?
7. Now the man gets up and runs from the police, turns and fires at one of them. Honestly you cannot make this shit up. What is going through he heads of the officers right now. Are they fearful? Are they thinking about George Floyd?
8. Taser dropped, gun pulled and fired within microseconds. Man is shot in the back. But what was his position when the officer was raising his gun? The second he pulled the trigger? We don't know.

So to me, bottom line is this Mr. Brooks would still be alive if 1-7 above didn't happen. Mr. Brooks was the cause of this situation. Unfortunately this happened when there is so much reaction/overreaction to what has happened in Minneapolis, etc. Now on top of all of this the the media making another circus out of this. I cannot even watch TV at this point. I want to scream at the screen, "homicide is not murder".

At the end of the day, I feel horrible that a husband & father of four died. I fell horrible for his wife and children. I also feel horrible for the officers and their families. They didn't go out on patrol thinking they were going to kill someone that night. And they wouldn't have except for the stupidity of one man who wanted a hamburger.

 

[shogun32]

Again, I am not taking a side on the outcome BUT I don't consider drunk driving a "little stupid thing". He drove there drunk. He appeared drunk, was appropriately given and failed a breathalyzer test. Drunk driving kills lots of people. I would be upset if the police didn't arrest him.

he didn't hit or injure anyone or anything and of his own (belated) recognizance pulled over to sleep it off. If he was actually operating the vehicle while drunk, sure arrest him. This 'arrest' is not quite as much utter BS as the ones done in the parking lot of the bar where a patron is sleeping it off before operating their vehicle. But taking his keys and making him come to the station to pick them back up again (in addition to the citation) is punishment aplenty.

 

[Bikeman315]

Granted the drunk driver should have submitted to being arrested for DUI (since obviously he did drive from wherever he had been drinking to the Wendy's) but likely thought it was an uncalled for punishment. I would actually agree. Cite him, take his keys till end of shift or just drive him to his sister's place and leave the car in a spot. All would have been zero-conflict and no unnecessary escalation.

I think bigger problem here (aside from the obvious) is the failure of the (2nd?) officer to exercise some situational judgement. Is this yet another side-effect of the "zero tolerance" crap infesting our society where finger-guns or pop-tarts with bites taken out of them are dangerous weapons?

It used to be Officer FRIENDLY, not Officer I'm going to blindly Arrest you for every little stupid thing.

Again, I am not taking a side on the outcome BUT I don't consider drunk driving a "little stupid thing". He drove there drunk. He appeared drunk, was appropriately given and failed a breathalyzer test. Drunk driving kills lots of people. I would be upset if the police didn't arrest him.

Gentleman, this is Georgia. The state legislature wrote a law that allows police offices to make arrests for a number of misdemeanor charges. One is drunk driving. The officers were following protocol, period. This was not a situation that called for "officer friendly". This called for serve & protect. How do they know that Mr. Brooks didn't run over and killed someone a mile away? I think they handled themselves properly right up to the moment that Mr. Brooks resisted arrest, starting fighting with the officers, took one of their weapons, ran from and tried to shoot them. At that point all bets are off, the adrenaline is pumping full blast and we get the horrific result that occurred. No sorry, this was not on the officers, this was on Mr. Brooks.

Sponsored