I wouldn't vote to convict the cop who shot Rayshard Brooks of murder

[Doc7505]

Is it racist to point out that loving father Rayshard Brooks was charged with cruelty to children, false imprisonment, battery on family member, and much more? Why hasn't the media mentioned this?

Probably because its either not true and or has nothing to do with the shooting. Why do you ask?

~~~~~~
Then explain to us why a person named Rayshard Brooks was named in a fugitive warrant for his arrest from the State of Georgia? He was violating his probation. The charges as follows: False imprisonment, cruelty to children, Family violence and battery.
See:

Rayshard Brooks Full Story Emerges – ‘I’m on probation, and any violation will send me back to jail’…

The Conservador found this footage from Rayshard Brook’s youtube channel recorded May 24. Brooks admits he’s on probation, and any violation will send him back to jail. Th…

www.citizenfreepress.com

This fully explains why this felon resisted arrest, physically fought the police and ended up dying at the hands of the police.
This is just another case of a felon violating his probation and being caught.

 

[Blues Man]

Is it racist to point out that loving father Rayshard Brooks was charged with cruelty to children, false imprisonment, battery on family member, and much more? Why hasn't the media mentioned this?

Probably because its either not true and or has nothing to do with the shooting. Why do you ask?

~~~~~~
Then explain to us why a person named Rayshard Brooks was named in a fugitive warrant for his arrest from the State of Georgia? He was violating his probation. The charges as follows: False imprisonment, cruelty to children, Family violence and battery.
See:

Rayshard Brooks Full Story Emerges – ‘I’m on probation, and any violation will send me back to jail’…

The Conservador found this footage from Rayshard Brook’s youtube channel recorded May 24. Brooks admits he’s on probation, and any violation will send him back to jail. Th…

www.citizenfreepress.com

This fully explains why this felon resisted arrest, physically fought the police and ended up dying at the hands of the police.
This is just another case of a felon violating his probation and being caught.

No one is excusing his actions.

But nothing he did was a capital crime.

He was shot in the back as he was running away. That is never a righteous shooting

 

[Asclepias]

Is it racist to point out that loving father Rayshard Brooks was charged with cruelty to children, false imprisonment, battery on family member, and much more? Why hasn't the media mentioned this?

Probably because its either not true and or has nothing to do with the shooting. Why do you ask?

~~~~~~
Then explain to us why a person named Rayshard Brooks was named in a fugitive warrant for his arrest from the State of Georgia? He was violating his probation. The charges as follows: False imprisonment, cruelty to children, Family violence and battery.
See:

Rayshard Brooks Full Story Emerges – ‘I’m on probation, and any violation will send me back to jail’…

The Conservador found this footage from Rayshard Brook’s youtube channel recorded May 24. Brooks admits he’s on probation, and any violation will send him back to jail. Th…

www.citizenfreepress.com

This fully explains why this felon resisted arrest, physically fought the police and ended up dying at the hands of the police.
This is just another case of a felon violating his probation and being caught.

Why would I need to explain anything to you that doesnt have anything to do with him getting shot in the back?

 

[Cecilie1200]

You’re absolutely right. The detractors will comment that the suspect was shot in the back. I have no issue with that. He actively resisted and fought back. He got what he deserved.

Anatomically speaking, getting hit in the back is what would happen if you're running away and then turn and try to fire a weapon at people behind you.

Pity the cops didn't have the luxury of hindsight while sitting on a couch, sipping coffee, the way the people jumping to criticize them do.

 

[Blues Man]

You’re absolutely right. The detractors will comment that the suspect was shot in the back. I have no issue with that. He actively resisted and fought back. He got what he deserved.

Anatomically speaking, getting hit in the back is what would happen if you're running away and then turn and try to fire a weapon at people behind you.

Pity the cops didn't have the luxury of hindsight while sitting on a couch, sipping coffee, the way the people jumping to criticize them do.

That weapon was a Taser not a gun. It had one shot and that one shot missed the cop by a mile. The cop knew he didn't have any other weapons on him because they frisked him.

So at the time he was shot Brooks was no longer a threat to either cop.

 

[Doc7505]

Is it racist to point out that loving father Rayshard Brooks was charged with cruelty to children, false imprisonment, battery on family member, and much more? Why hasn't the media mentioned this?

Probably because its either not true and or has nothing to do with the shooting. Why do you ask?

~~~~~~
Then explain to us why a person named Rayshard Brooks was named in a fugitive warrant for his arrest from the State of Georgia? He was violating his probation. The charges as follows: False imprisonment, cruelty to children, Family violence and battery.
See:

Rayshard Brooks Full Story Emerges – ‘I’m on probation, and any violation will send me back to jail’…

The Conservador found this footage from Rayshard Brook’s youtube channel recorded May 24. Brooks admits he’s on probation, and any violation will send him back to jail. Th…

www.citizenfreepress.com

This fully explains why this felon resisted arrest, physically fought the police and ended up dying at the hands of the police.
This is just another case of a felon violating his probation and being caught.

Why would I need to explain anything to you that doesnt have anything to do with him getting shot in the back?

~~~~~~~
That's B.S. it has everything to do why he was shot. If he had complied with the police and NOT resisted arrest, he'd be alive and in jail today. That is pure logic. He violated his probation and refused to comply with the law. By his own actions he forfeited his life.

 

[Blues Man]

Is it racist to point out that loving father Rayshard Brooks was charged with cruelty to children, false imprisonment, battery on family member, and much more? Why hasn't the media mentioned this?

Probably because its either not true and or has nothing to do with the shooting. Why do you ask?

~~~~~~
Then explain to us why a person named Rayshard Brooks was named in a fugitive warrant for his arrest from the State of Georgia? He was violating his probation. The charges as follows: False imprisonment, cruelty to children, Family violence and battery.
See:

Rayshard Brooks Full Story Emerges – ‘I’m on probation, and any violation will send me back to jail’…

The Conservador found this footage from Rayshard Brook’s youtube channel recorded May 24. Brooks admits he’s on probation, and any violation will send him back to jail. Th…

www.citizenfreepress.com

This fully explains why this felon resisted arrest, physically fought the police and ended up dying at the hands of the police.
This is just another case of a felon violating his probation and being caught.

Why would I need to explain anything to you that doesnt have anything to do with him getting shot in the back?

~~~~~~~
That's B.S. it has everything to do why he was shot. If he had complied with the police and NOT resisted arrest, he'd be alive and in jail today. That is pure logic. He violated his probation and refused to comply with the law. By his own actions he forfeited his life.

He was no longer a threat when he was shot in the back

The cops are not given authority to kill a person simply because he would not comply. No civilain could have shot a person in the back as he was running away and then claim their life was in danger. Why should a cop be able to?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I wouldn't vote to convict the cop who shot Rayshard Brooks of murder

After watching all the videos several times - I strongly disagree! There was no need to shoot him twice in the back as he ran away. The cops already had possession of his car, keys, and driver's license. The cops could have easily deescalated the situation and rounded him up later. The one cop seemed reasonable - but the killer cop was an asshole.

After watching you post many, many, TOO MANY times, I strongly expected you to disagree whether you watched the videos or not.

I'm sure YOU think "there was no need", based on your extensive training and experience as a cop dealing with violent drunks on the street . . . oh, no, wait, you actually have no real clue what the hell you're talking about.

What the hell does "already had possession of his car, keys, and driver's license" have to do with anything? What, if you have someone's ID, that stops 'em from shooting you with a Taser, does it?

"The cops should have just let him do whatever he wanted, and tried again later. How DARE they think he should have to cooperate?!" So you subscribe to the, "Stop, or I'll yell stop again! But you don't have to if you don't want to" school of policing, do you? And what if he takes the Taser he stole from the cop and uses it to rob a convenience store, or mug an old lady, or go home and abuse his wife in the meantime? For that matter, what if he'd actually managed to hit the cop he fired the Taser at, and once the cop was down, had taken his gun and shot someone? What if the weapon he fired at them when he turned hadn't been the stolen Taser, but a gun he'd had on him?

You continue to be a ignorant, agenda-driven sow. I won't tell you you shouldn't speak, but I will tell you that you should, just once in your life, try thinking before you do so.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You’re absolutely right. The detractors will comment that the suspect was shot in the back. I have no issue with that. He actively resisted and fought back. He got what he deserved.

Oh bullshit. If I slapped you does that mean you shoot and kill me?

No, but if you hit him, steal his Taser, and then turn and fire at him, it very likely will mean that.

 

[Cecilie1200]

There are differences between the George Floyd case and the Brooks case.
The latter grabbed a taser and punched the cop in the face.
Did anyone here ever think that punching a cop in the face works result in a low chance of being killed by that cop?
People are not supposed to attack cops.
If I'm a cop and a man in trying to arrest takes my taser and punches me, it's on.
And I'm a Democrat.

Shot him in the back after dropping his Taser. Back shooting cop is a low life POS.

Heat of the moment. Confusion due to being hit in the face. Shot in the back irrelevant.

I wouldn't say shot in the back is irrelevant. If he was confused he shouldn't be shooting anywhere anyways. That said, the are many degrees difference between George Floyd and this case.

Here is something that is ironic. Apparently they spoke to him for 43 minutes before the attempted arrest. He may have felt more confident that he could get away, or they were weak/not the type to shoot him if he ran. If they had rolled up and played it hard with him, maybe he clams up in his drunk state and puts his hands behind his back and goes quietly.

There is also the fact that there has been so much outrage of late. Will some feel they have more leeway now with this being the fact? "These guys aren't going to try and stop me, there are 20 witnesses with cameras and there are race protests going on".

I don't know, but it's not healthy for anyone.

So your armchair policing theory NOW is that the cops should never do anything on the street unless they're absolutely, 100% sure of every detail first.

Yeah, that'll be effective.

 

[Cecilie1200]

There are differences between the George Floyd case and the Brooks case.
The latter grabbed a taser and punched the cop in the face.
Did anyone here ever think that punching a cop in the face works result in a low chance of being killed by that cop?
People are not supposed to attack cops.
If I'm a cop and a man in trying to arrest takes my taser and punches me, it's on.
And I'm a Democrat.

Shot him in the back after dropping his Taser. Back shooting cop is a low life POS.

took his taser, fired it at him, was shot the second he turned around.

All thing like this will do is encourage people to resist arrest.

Non-Leathal vs. Lethal. Makes it all good I suppose. Give me a break.

Which still begs the question, did the cops KNOW that was the stolen Taser he was pointing at them, rather than a gun he'd had on him? Should they have waited until someone got shot to find out? What if he'd incapacitated the cop with the Taser and then taken his gun?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Oh bullshit. If I slapped you does that mean you shoot and kill me?

About 90% of the time, yes.

You are a punk just like that cop.

You are a piece of shit, just like that drunk criminal.

 

[Blues Man]

I wouldn't vote to convict the cop who shot Rayshard Brooks of murder

After watching all the videos several times - I strongly disagree! There was no need to shoot him twice in the back as he ran away. The cops already had possession of his car, keys, and driver's license. The cops could have easily deescalated the situation and rounded him up later. The one cop seemed reasonable - but the killer cop was an asshole.

After watching you post many, many, TOO MANY times, I strongly expected you to disagree whether you watched the videos or not.

I'm sure YOU think "there was no need", based on your extensive training and experience as a cop dealing with violent drunks on the street . . . oh, no, wait, you actually have no real clue what the hell you're talking about.

What the hell does "already had possession of his car, keys, and driver's license" have to do with anything? What, if you have someone's ID, that stops 'em from shooting you with a Taser, does it?

"The cops should have just let him do whatever he wanted, and tried again later. How DARE they think he should have to cooperate?!" So you subscribe to the, "Stop, or I'll yell stop again! But you don't have to if you don't want to" school of policing, do you? And what if he takes the Taser he stole from the cop and uses it to rob a convenience store, or mug an old lady, or go home and abuse his wife in the meantime? For that matter, what if he'd actually managed to hit the cop he fired the Taser at, and once the cop was down, had taken his gun and shot someone? What if the weapon he fired at them when he turned hadn't been the stolen Taser, but a gun he'd had on him?

You continue to be a ignorant, agenda-driven sow. I won't tell you you shouldn't speak, but I will tell you that you should, just once in your life, try thinking before you do so.

That's just the point.

The cop knew that taser had only one shot in it. That shot missed the cop by a mile. The cop should have known because of his extensive training that Brooks had no possibility of firing that taser again.

It is because of their training that cops need to be held to a higher standard than civilians.

 

[Cecilie1200]

As has been stated many times by legal experts: a taser is not considered a lethal weapon.

As has been stated many times by thinking experts (ie. not you): that's not the point.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I wouldn't vote to convict the cop who shot Rayshard Brooks of murder

After watching all the videos several times - I strongly disagree! There was no need to shoot him twice in the back as he ran away. The cops already had possession of his car, keys, and driver's license. The cops could have easily deescalated the situation and rounded him up later. The one cop seemed reasonable - but the killer cop was an asshole.

After watching you post many, many, TOO MANY times, I strongly expected you to disagree whether you watched the videos or not.

I'm sure YOU think "there was no need", based on your extensive training and experience as a cop dealing with violent drunks on the street . . . oh, no, wait, you actually have no real clue what the hell you're talking about.

What the hell does "already had possession of his car, keys, and driver's license" have to do with anything? What, if you have someone's ID, that stops 'em from shooting you with a Taser, does it?

"The cops should have just let him do whatever he wanted, and tried again later. How DARE they think he should have to cooperate?!" So you subscribe to the, "Stop, or I'll yell stop again! But you don't have to if you don't want to" school of policing, do you? And what if he takes the Taser he stole from the cop and uses it to rob a convenience store, or mug an old lady, or go home and abuse his wife in the meantime? For that matter, what if he'd actually managed to hit the cop he fired the Taser at, and once the cop was down, had taken his gun and shot someone? What if the weapon he fired at them when he turned hadn't been the stolen Taser, but a gun he'd had on him?

You continue to be a ignorant, agenda-driven sow. I won't tell you you shouldn't speak, but I will tell you that you should, just once in your life, try thinking before you do so.

That's just the point.

The cop knew that taser had only one shot in it. That shot missed the cop by a mile. The cop should have known because of his extensive training that Brooks had no possibility of firing that taser again.

It is because of their training that cops need to be held to a higher standard than civilians.

Here's a point for YOU: read my entire post before presuming to tell me "That's just the point", followed by ignoring large chunks of what I said.

Epic fail. Dismissed. Moving on to people who read, not just scroll down to where they can talk more.

 

[Blues Man]

I wouldn't vote to convict the cop who shot Rayshard Brooks of murder

After watching all the videos several times - I strongly disagree! There was no need to shoot him twice in the back as he ran away. The cops already had possession of his car, keys, and driver's license. The cops could have easily deescalated the situation and rounded him up later. The one cop seemed reasonable - but the killer cop was an asshole.

After watching you post many, many, TOO MANY times, I strongly expected you to disagree whether you watched the videos or not.

I'm sure YOU think "there was no need", based on your extensive training and experience as a cop dealing with violent drunks on the street . . . oh, no, wait, you actually have no real clue what the hell you're talking about.

What the hell does "already had possession of his car, keys, and driver's license" have to do with anything? What, if you have someone's ID, that stops 'em from shooting you with a Taser, does it?

"The cops should have just let him do whatever he wanted, and tried again later. How DARE they think he should have to cooperate?!" So you subscribe to the, "Stop, or I'll yell stop again! But you don't have to if you don't want to" school of policing, do you? And what if he takes the Taser he stole from the cop and uses it to rob a convenience store, or mug an old lady, or go home and abuse his wife in the meantime? For that matter, what if he'd actually managed to hit the cop he fired the Taser at, and once the cop was down, had taken his gun and shot someone? What if the weapon he fired at them when he turned hadn't been the stolen Taser, but a gun he'd had on him?

You continue to be a ignorant, agenda-driven sow. I won't tell you you shouldn't speak, but I will tell you that you should, just once in your life, try thinking before you do so.

That's just the point.

The cop knew that taser had only one shot in it. That shot missed the cop by a mile. The cop should have known because of his extensive training that Brooks had no possibility of firing that taser again.

It is because of their training that cops need to be held to a higher standard than civilians.

Here's a point for YOU: read my entire post before presuming to tell me "That's just the point", followed by ignoring large chunks of what I said.

Epic fail. Dismissed. Moving on to people who read, not just scroll down to where they can talk more.

I saw no reason to read any more of your little rant because I had all I needed to respond

 

[Blues Man]

There are differences between the George Floyd case and the Brooks case.
The latter grabbed a taser and punched the cop in the face.
Did anyone here ever think that punching a cop in the face works result in a low chance of being killed by that cop?
People are not supposed to attack cops.
If I'm a cop and a man in trying to arrest takes my taser and punches me, it's on.
And I'm a Democrat.

Shot him in the back after dropping his Taser. Back shooting cop is a low life POS.

took his taser, fired it at him, was shot the second he turned around.

All thing like this will do is encourage people to resist arrest.

Non-Leathal vs. Lethal. Makes it all good I suppose. Give me a break.

Which still begs the question, did the cops KNOW that was the stolen Taser he was pointing at them, rather than a gun he'd had on him? Should they have waited until someone got shot to find out? What if he'd incapacitated the cop with the Taser and then taken his gun?

The cops had frisked him before they tried to put the cuffs on him.

So yeah they knew he didn't have a gun or another taser on him and yeah they knew the taser he had belonged to one of the cops

 

[Andylusion]

There are differences between the George Floyd case and the Brooks case.
The latter grabbed a taser and punched the cop in the face.
Did anyone here ever think that punching a cop in the face works result in a low chance of being killed by that cop?
People are not supposed to attack cops.
If I'm a cop and a man in trying to arrest takes my taser and punches me, it's on.
And I'm a Democrat.

Shot him in the back after dropping his Taser. Back shooting cop is a low life POS.

Honestly, you attack a police officer, or take a police officers weapon of any kind.... you just deserve to be flat out shot. Back, front, side, top, bottom.... you need shot. You are a garbage human being, that needs to be removed from society, for the good of society.

 

[Blues Man]

There are differences between the George Floyd case and the Brooks case.
The latter grabbed a taser and punched the cop in the face.
Did anyone here ever think that punching a cop in the face works result in a low chance of being killed by that cop?
People are not supposed to attack cops.
If I'm a cop and a man in trying to arrest takes my taser and punches me, it's on.
And I'm a Democrat.

Shot him in the back after dropping his Taser. Back shooting cop is a low life POS.

Honestly, you attack a police officer, or take a police officers weapon of any kind.... you just deserve to be flat out shot. Back, front, side, top, bottom.... you need shot. You are a garbage human being, that needs to be removed from society, for the good of society.

Even if you are running away and the cops were not hurt at all ?

No cops have to be held to a higher standard than that

 

[Dragonlady]

Is it racist to point out that loving father Rayshard Brooks was charged with cruelty to children, false imprisonment, battery on family member, and much more? Why hasn't the media mentioned this?

Probably because its either not true and or has nothing to do with the shooting. Why do you ask?

~~~~~~
Then explain to us why a person named Rayshard Brooks was named in a fugitive warrant for his arrest from the State of Georgia? He was violating his probation. The charges as follows: False imprisonment, cruelty to children, Family violence and battery.
See:

Rayshard Brooks Full Story Emerges – ‘I’m on probation, and any violation will send me back to jail’…

The Conservador found this footage from Rayshard Brook’s youtube channel recorded May 24. Brooks admits he’s on probation, and any violation will send him back to jail. Th…

www.citizenfreepress.com

This fully explains why this felon resisted arrest, physically fought the police and ended up dying at the hands of the police.
This is just another case of a felon violating his probation and being caught.

Au contraire, my gullible fool. This is yet another case of a cop with a LONG history of excessive use of force, and complaints about excessive use of force, who is still allowed to carry a gun and police the public. It was announced that this office had at least a half dozen complaints of excessive force in the community.

Trump says it's just of few "bad apples". Any fool knows that if an apple is bad, you throw it out immediately because if left where it is, the rot will spread to the rest of the basket.