Cop in America doing a bad job, again

GiddyUp said:
So execution it is.
Click to expand...
I mean, what was the cop supposed to do? The guy stole his taser and turned around looking like he was gonna use it. At what point is it a justified shooting? Even if he shot his leg, I think some of you would think that would be too egregious.
 
And no, I'm not saying the guy deserved to die before any of you go there. Or even be shot. Genuinely asking, what do you think the cop should have done?
 
Man of Leisure said:
And no, I'm not saying the guy deserved to die before any of you go there. Or even be shot. Genuinely asking, what do you think the cop should have done?
Click to expand...

looks like other cops have reacted differently to more serious situations
 
berbatrick said:
looks like other cops have reacted differently to more serious situations
Click to expand...

I mean, that's a totally different situation. From what I can tell in the video, that looks like a shoplifter? And when he turns around and shoots at him, wouldn't the cop be justified firing back? I mean, it's good that the situation ended without anyone being injured and all (if that's indeed what happened), but the guy running away actually shot at him?
 
berbatrick said:
looks like other cops have reacted differently to more serious situations
Click to expand...

That tweet is another attempt at race-baiting. Both incidents are very different, and each incident should be judged on its own merits anyway.
The Atlanta one was a bad shoot. The NM one the guy wasn’t holding anything but in seconds drew out a firearm and shot. However, I could see that he was reaching in his waistband while running. At that point I would have drawn my gun and pointed at him in case he did present a firearm.
 
Man of Leisure said:
I mean, what was the cop supposed to do? The guy stole his taser and turned around looking like he was gonna use it. At what point is it a justified shooting? Even if he shot his leg, I think some of you would think that would be too egregious.
Click to expand...

Its kind of hard to judge tbh.
Shooting him in the back obviously isn't a good answer but there's layers upon layers of pretty broken stuff in there. Anyone and everyone having a gun being a good one. Suspect probably justifiably feeling like he's in a life or death situation being another. You'd probably have to list off a hundred different changes to even begin untangling that mess.
Letting him escape probably have been preferable i'd think. Shooting should be an absolute last resort really and doing so should raise serious questions. There'll be times its definitely justified - America is just too damn dangerous for it to avoided at times but this doesn't look like one of them.
 
caid said:
Letting him escape probably have been preferable i'd think. Shooting should be an absolute last resort really and doing so should raise serious questions. There'll be times its definitely justified - America is just too damn dangerous for it to avoided at times but this doesn't look like one of them.
Click to expand...
While I think you're right, it's a tough call. If a cop lets someone go, and that person ends up hurting someone else, there'd be a lot of questions raised.
 
Man of Leisure said:
While I think you're right, it's a tough call. If a cop lets someone go, and that person ends up hurting someone else, there'd be a lot of questions raised.
Click to expand...

feck outta here this guy was sleeping in his car. He's gonna run away and harm who... So let's pump lead in him just in case? Ignoring the whole innocent until guilty thing?
 
His partner was behind him trying to catch up, at least that’s what it looked like.
another example of deadly force by US cops. How many more do we need to make a change?
Go for the police pension fund and change will be immediate.
 
We need cops. Just need to change the current system. It’s not working. It hasn’t worked for a very long time. How long more until it’s realized?
 
Man of Leisure said:
I mean, what was the cop supposed to do? The guy stole his taser and turned around looking like he was gonna use it. At what point is it a justified shooting? Even if he shot his leg, I think some of you would think that would be too egregious.
Click to expand...
Man of Leisure said:
And no, I'm not saying the guy deserved to die before any of you go there. Or even be shot. Genuinely asking, what do you think the cop should have done?
Click to expand...
They knew who he was, they had his car, assistance was on the way. They could have chased him in their car and boxed him in. Or they could have just picked him up in the morning. He hadn't even committed a crime in the first place for feck's sake. They could have just checked he was ok and made sure he got home safely, which is what would have happened if it was a white person I'm sure.

This faux rationalisation of police brutality just has to stop.
 
Man of Leisure said:
I mean, that's a totally different situation. From what I can tell in the video, that looks like a shoplifter? And when he turns around and shoots at him, wouldn't the cop be justified firing back? I mean, it's good that the situation ended without anyone being injured and all (if that's indeed what happened), but the guy running away actually shot at him?
Click to expand...

100% the officer would be justified in firing back. The point is he didn’t, despite almost potentially losing his life; therefore the use of deadly force in the other scenario, while an option, was not necessarily required. Obviously everyone handles stressful/traumatic situations like that differently. If you ask me, if you can’t handle the situation with the taser without resorting to taking a life you probably shouldn’t be given a gun.
 
Wait they were arresting him first and at one point they even had him on the ground before he broke free. At that point would they have not discerned if he had a weapon on him ?
 
Man of Leisure said:
While I think you're right, it's a tough call. If a cop lets someone go, and that person ends up hurting someone else, there'd be a lot of questions raised.
Click to expand...
Its not a tough call for a suspected DUI
 
Man of Leisure said:
And no, I'm not saying the guy deserved to die before any of you go there. Or even be shot. Genuinely asking, what do you think the cop should have done?
Click to expand...

Chase him down, call for backup or admit defeat and let him go.

Shooting should never be an option when trying to apprehend someone for a non violent crime of which they have not been found guilty.

There is no reasonable reason to think that the man getting away was going to be a great danger to the lives of the general public
 
Man of Leisure said:
While I think you're right, it's a tough call. If a cop lets someone go, and that person ends up hurting someone else, there'd be a lot of questions raised.
Click to expand...
Sleeping in the passenger seat of your car definitely needs to end in being shot in the back 3 times, I mean if they hadn’t killed him who knows what he could have gone on and done.
 
berbatrick said:
looks like other cops have reacted differently to more serious situations
Click to expand...

Man of Leisure said:
The more I think about it, that's such a strange tweet. I don't think anyone's claiming the cops had to kill. But the cop there is only uninjured because the shoplifter missed. Should the standard police response be let yourself be shot at and hope the guy has the aim of a stormtrooper?

Found a news account - https://abcnews.go.com/US/body-cam-video-shows-alleged-shoplifter-shooting-police/story?id=57410159
Click to expand...
That'sHernandez said:
100% the officer would be justified in firing back. The point is he didn’t, despite almost potentially losing his life; therefore the use of deadly force in the other scenario, while an option, was not necessarily required. Obviously everyone handles stressful/traumatic situations like that differently. If you ask me, if you can’t handle the situation with the taser without resorting to taking a life you probably shouldn’t be given a gun.
Click to expand...

The use of force to kill in the UK has to be considered reasonable and absolutely necessary. I can't see how this was the case in the latest US shooting video, especially when you consider the guy was simply suspected of drink driving and was running away. Obviously the stolen taser, which is classed as a firearm here, massively escalates matters but even still is it absolutely necessary to take a life? I certainly don't think so.

The said the above tweet is a mess and is most certainly put there to stir up more tension. Posting an example of an officer almost being killed as if to say "that's what they should do" is utter bollocks. Each set of circumstances and individual is different.
 
TheReligion said:
It is in the UK. It's classed as a S5 firearm. As is incapacitatent spray (CS gas etc). Without going too much into it it's due to the fact you can continually discharge it.
Click to expand...

Does it meed the requirement for response with deadly force if it's employed against you?
 
Grinner said:
Does it meed the requirement for response with deadly force if it's employed against you?
Click to expand...

Having been accidentally sprayed with CS gas on several occasions and wanting to kill my colleagues I'm going to say yes..

On a serious note as I say it's a case of is the force reasonable (in the eyes of the user) and is it absolutely necessary. In the UK lethal force is allowed when defending any person, to effect a lawful arrest, prevent escape and quell a riot or insurrection. The force must be absolutely necessary and proportionate to meet one of those aims taking into consideration the danger and risk to life.

So two similar situations can be different depending on a number of factors.
 
You can justify using lethal force if you were getting beaten to a pulp for instance. There doesn't need to be a firearm present or any other aggravating factor. It's all about the circumstances and applying them with the law. As I said in this situation I can't see how it was absolutely necessary to kill him.

It was a drink driving offence, they likely knew who he was, there was no threat to the wider public or themselves, he was running away with the firearm.

@choiboyx012 made a valid point that there is an argument that if he was trying to taser the officer you could look to justify it given the implications of that could be to cause the officer serious injury/death or allow him to take his gun and become a wider risk to the public. I still think it's a stretch mind but it's certainly the way this is going to play out I feel.
 
Man of Leisure said:
I mean, what was the cop supposed to do? The guy stole his taser and turned around looking like he was gonna use it. At what point is it a justified shooting? Even if he shot his leg, I think some of you would think that would be too egregious.
Click to expand...
He shot him 3 times in the back. How about chase after him. It alao seems to me from the video that he fired the taser and missed. Do you thing he deserved to die for this?
 
TheReligion said:
You can justify using lethal force if you were getting beaten to a pulp for instance. There doesn't need to be a firearm present or any other aggravating factor. It's all about the circumstances and applying them with the law. As I said in this situation I can't see how it was absolutely necessary to kill him.

It was a drink driving offence, they likely knew who he was, there was no threat to the wider public or themselves, he was running away with the firearm.

@choiboyx012 made a valid point that there is an argument that if he was trying to taser the officer you could look to justify it given the implications of that could be to cause the officer serious injury/death or allow him to take his gun and become a wider risk to the public. I still think it's a stretch mind but it's certainly the way this is going to play out I feel.
Click to expand...
So a person can justify lethal force if he is getting beaten to a pulp by police as well? I mean if it's life and death you do what you gotta do. If you are being choked by a police officer and you can't breath can you turn the tables if possible and choke out the copper? It's not like you went in to a church and murdered 12 people, you committed a non violent crime or fell asleep in a parking lot, no way are you getting the death penalty but a police force reckons it's ok for you to die for that after they escalate a situation or fail to descalate. When can people fight back to save their lives? Never?
 
Last edited:
GiddyUp said:
So a person can justify lethal force if he is getting beaten to a pulp by police as well? I mean if it's life and death you do what you gotta do. If you are being choked by a police officer and you can't breath can you turn the tables if possible and choke out the copper? It's not like you went in to a church and murdered 12 people, you committed a non violent crime or fell asleep in a parking lot, no way are you getting the death penalty but a police force reckons it's ok for you to die for that after they escalate a situation or fail to descalate. When can people fight back to save their lives? Never?
Click to expand...
No one said it’s ok for him to die.
the video doesn’t show what led up to the fight. Reportedly he was performing a field sobriety test and failed. If the officers were attempting to cuff him up to arrest him, and he resisted and fought back, then it isn’t the officers who escalated the situation but Brooks who did. He wrestled with the officers, he grabbed one’s taser, he threw some punches, he continued to flee, he turned and aimed the taser at the pursuing officer.
At that moment he is no longer “non-violent” and “just sleeping in his car”. The initial encounter might have been peaceful, we don’t know unless there’s bodycam footage. Maybe the cops did escalate it unnecessarily. Or, maybe Brooks knew he was going to jail and didn’t want to go with the program and decided to resist and fight back. Maybe he was under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs which altered his state of mind and decision making. There’s still more info that needs to come out. Ultimately, the officer that shot was not justified in doing so imo.
 
Guy was an idiot. If you're fighting cops, take one of their weapons and then aim it at them then what the feck do you think is gonna happen?
 
RedPed said:
They knew who he was, they had his car, assistance was on the way. They could have chased him in their car and boxed him in. Or they could have just picked him up in the morning. He hadn't even committed a crime in the first place for feck's sake. They could have just checked he was ok and made sure he got home safely, which is what would have happened if it was a white person I'm sure.
Click to expand...
Nah, I'm almost certain this wouldn't have been the case. This happened in Atlanta, not in podunk Mayberry.

Not sure what you mean by "He hadn't even committed a crime in the first place?" Likely DUI, resisting arrest and I'm sure stealing a cop's taser has to be some sort of crime. Unless you mean he hasn't been convicted yet?
Cassidy said:
Chase him down, call for backup or admit defeat and let him go.

Shooting should never be an option when trying to apprehend someone for a non violent crime of which they have not been found guilty.

There is no reasonable reason to think that the man getting away was going to be a great danger to the lives of the general public
Click to expand...
Yah, you and @RedPed point out some valid alternatives to the nuclear option. But at the moment when the guy turns around with a taser in his hand, there's gotta be another option for the cop other than hoping he misses. Yes, shooting might be too strong, but surely he must have felt threatened and should be able to defend himself. Can't tell from the Wendy's video at which point the police fire their guns.

It's interesting you also point out the suspect hasn't been found guilty of a crime yet. By that logic, firing your weapon should never be an option under any circumstance since you can only be found guilty in a court of law.
Rado_N said:
Sleeping in the passenger seat of your car definitely needs to end in being shot in the back 3 times, I mean if they hadn’t killed him who knows what he could have gone on and done.
Click to expand...
I think you know that's not what I was implying. Didn't realize they shot him 3 times though. That's bad.

On a separate note, this starts off eerily similar to the Darren McFadden situation you posted in the NFL thread.
GiddyUp said:
He shot him 3 times in the back. How about chase after him. It alao seems to me from the video that he fired the taser and missed. Do you thing he deserved to die for this?
Click to expand...
Of course not, don't think anyone is saying that. Seems like the biggest mistake from the police (besides the obvious shooting the dude in the back three times) was letting him grab the cop's taser and escaping from them in the first place. Would be horribly ironic if that leads to justification for using more force when arresting someone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.