TemplarKormac
Political Atheist
- Thread starter
- #281
A taser is classified as a firearm under Georgia law. See OP.A taser is not a gun.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
A taser is classified as a firearm under Georgia law. See OP.A taser is not a gun.
It is not a gun.A taser is classified as a firearm under Georgia law. See OP.A taser is not a gun.
A taser is not a gun.
Again...he was running AWAY. What other could they have taken?No. It would have been lethal if those prongs had attached to the officer's skull. Those tasers have a 15 foot range, and can discharge up to 50,000 volts directly into the target.He was running away as he was trying to fire it, a non lethal weapon of very limited range.He grabbed a fully charged taser and attempted to incapacitate or kill a police officer with it.A lot of people don't try to disarm the arresting officer when resisting arrest, nor do they attempt to us that officer's weapon against him. They simply want to get away. That's it, that's all.A lot of people resist arrest. Is that a death sentence?No. Not when he chose to employ violence to resist arrest. Not when he took a fully loaded taser from an officer and fled with it.. Not whe he fired said taser at the police officer. He already presented himself as a threat. All of his good behavior prior to the altercation was rendered moot.Unfortunately for you, as opposed to you living clear across the other side of the planet, thousands of miles away, I live in the state in question. Seventy miles away from Atlanta.He had already attempted to cause serious bodily injury to Rolfe by firing a taser at him. By that time, Brooks had begun to flee with a partially loaded (but no less dangerous) taser in his hand. He was brought down to end any threat would have presented to other people in the area.
I'll say it again. He had dropped the taser. A taser in non-lethal. It also has to be recharged once fired - he had no way of doing that because it was out of its holster.
Experience tells me - tells anyone - that he was no danger to any other person. He was drunk and being stupid. Not psychotic. And if a cop can't tell the difference between those behaviours, then maybe they shouldn't be in the police.
Looks like the Atlanta prosecutor and police agree with me. They made the right call.
It has nothing to do with his emotional state, it had everything to do with his compliance with lawfully given orders.
The taser in question was fully charged and was capable of firing 2 cartridges. It did not need to be charged in between shots. It is just as dangerous when the first or second cartridge is fired.
The man was a drunk driver.
Could a non lethal means of resolving the situation been used?
He did not grab his gun.
Again...is that a death sentence?
So, yes.
That is enough to stop the human heart from beating.
These arguments that the taser was non lethal are intellectually dishonest.
It is not a gun.A taser is classified as a firearm under Georgia law. See OP.A taser is not a gun.
None of those things were mitigating factors when he chose to become violent with the police officers. What they were doing wasn't some desk job where they could carefully plan out their reactons.I never claim to be completely dispassionate, Coyote. But I follow where the trail leads, whether that be a destination I like or a destination I don't.I do not think you are as dispassionate as you claim. You choose to follow one of two branching paths to your conclusion: what could Rashard have done differently to have prevented his death.No. I am not. I am stating facts and information, backed with evidence and legal precedent. Most of the arguments I have encountered in this thread thus far have either been emotional or irrelevant to the situation at hand.Isn’t that what you are doing?I will let the law decide that. Not you. What other recourse was left to the officer after he had a taser fired at him?Still not punishable by death.However, I do feel a $5000 fine and a year in jail is way excessive just for punching someone in the face.
He punched an officer in the face, which escalated it to an aggravated misdemeanor, and ergo, felony resisting arrest.
This armchair quarterbacking is getting old. You all accuse me of lacking understanding, but it is you who REFUSE to understand.
If you feel there is no other recourse...maybe the question is,what sort of training do tbe get that they should feel there is no alternative short of lethal force For a drunk driver?
It wasn't that he was a drunk driver, it was the moment he chose to become a violent felon while resisting arrest. Had he fully cooperated with those officers, we wouldn't be in this thread lofting well-intended points over each other's heads.
What about the other path?
Logic is a factor here as well. What would you have done in the officer's shoes at that moment in time? Lets say you had the legal expertise and training that officer had. What would you have done??
You don't get time to weigh your options with a violent assailant, you either let him flee or you stop him by whatever means are available. If he presents danger to both you an the greater community, the time for exacting mercy on the assailant has passed. Your main considerations are those of the safety of you and your colleagues and of the surrounding populace.
Here is the pertinent point to me (and I can’t speak to training...neither of us can)...the person was fleeing. I had in hand his I’d, wallet, car keys. I knew where he lived. I knew his criminal record (not particularly violent, no weapons charges). I could pick him up later. I had that choice.
Again...he was running AWAY. What other actions could they have taken?No. It would have been lethal if those prongs had attached to the officer's skull. Those tasers have a 15 foot range, and can discharge up to 50,000 volts directly into the target.He was running away as he was trying to fire it, a non lethal weapon of very limited range.He grabbed a fully charged taser and attempted to incapacitate or kill a police officer with it.A lot of people don't try to disarm the arresting officer when resisting arrest, nor do they attempt to us that officer's weapon against him. They simply want to get away. That's it, that's all.A lot of people resist arrest. Is that a death sentence?No. Not when he chose to employ violence to resist arrest. Not when he took a fully loaded taser from an officer and fled with it.. Not whe he fired said taser at the police officer. He already presented himself as a threat. All of his good behavior prior to the altercation was rendered moot.Unfortunately for you, as opposed to you living clear across the other side of the planet, thousands of miles away, I live in the state in question. Seventy miles away from Atlanta.He had already attempted to cause serious bodily injury to Rolfe by firing a taser at him. By that time, Brooks had begun to flee with a partially loaded (but no less dangerous) taser in his hand. He was brought down to end any threat would have presented to other people in the area.
I'll say it again. He had dropped the taser. A taser in non-lethal. It also has to be recharged once fired - he had no way of doing that because it was out of its holster.
Experience tells me - tells anyone - that he was no danger to any other person. He was drunk and being stupid. Not psychotic. And if a cop can't tell the difference between those behaviours, then maybe they shouldn't be in the police.
Looks like the Atlanta prosecutor and police agree with me. They made the right call.
It has nothing to do with his emotional state, it had everything to do with his compliance with lawfully given orders.
The taser in question was fully charged and was capable of firing 2 cartridges. It did not need to be charged in between shots. It is just as dangerous when the first or second cartridge is fired.
The man was a drunk driver.
Could a non lethal means of resolving the situation been used?
He did not grab his gun.
Again...is that a death sentence?
So, yes.
That is enough to stop the human heart from beating.
These arguments that the taser was non lethal are intellectually dishonest.
Again...he was running AWAY. What other could they have taken?No. It would have been lethal if those prongs had attached to the officer's skull. Those tasers have a 15 foot range, and can discharge up to 50,000 volts directly into the target.He was running away as he was trying to fire it, a non lethal weapon of very limited range.He grabbed a fully charged taser and attempted to incapacitate or kill a police officer with it.A lot of people don't try to disarm the arresting officer when resisting arrest, nor do they attempt to us that officer's weapon against him. They simply want to get away. That's it, that's all.A lot of people resist arrest. Is that a death sentence?No. Not when he chose to employ violence to resist arrest. Not when he took a fully loaded taser from an officer and fled with it.. Not whe he fired said taser at the police officer. He already presented himself as a threat. All of his good behavior prior to the altercation was rendered moot.Unfortunately for you, as opposed to you living clear across the other side of the planet, thousands of miles away, I live in the state in question. Seventy miles away from Atlanta.He had already attempted to cause serious bodily injury to Rolfe by firing a taser at him. By that time, Brooks had begun to flee with a partially loaded (but no less dangerous) taser in his hand. He was brought down to end any threat would have presented to other people in the area.
I'll say it again. He had dropped the taser. A taser in non-lethal. It also has to be recharged once fired - he had no way of doing that because it was out of its holster.
Experience tells me - tells anyone - that he was no danger to any other person. He was drunk and being stupid. Not psychotic. And if a cop can't tell the difference between those behaviours, then maybe they shouldn't be in the police.
Looks like the Atlanta prosecutor and police agree with me. They made the right call.
It has nothing to do with his emotional state, it had everything to do with his compliance with lawfully given orders.
The taser in question was fully charged and was capable of firing 2 cartridges. It did not need to be charged in between shots. It is just as dangerous when the first or second cartridge is fired.
The man was a drunk driver.
Could a non lethal means of resolving the situation been used?
He did not grab his gun.
Again...is that a death sentence?
So, yes.
That is enough to stop the human heart from beating.
These arguments that the taser was non lethal are intellectually dishonest.
None of those things were mitigating factors whe he chose to become violent with the pokice officers. What they were doing wasn't some desk job where they could carefully plan out their reactons.I never claim to be completely dispassionate, Coyote. But I follow where the trail leads, whether that be a destination I like or a destination I don't.I do not think you are as dispassionate as you claim. You choose to follow one of two branching paths to your conclusion: what could Rashard have done differently to have prevented his death.No. I am not. I am stating facts and information, backed with evidence and legal precedent. Most of the arguments I have encountered in this thread thus far have either been emotional or irrelevant to the situation at hand.Isn’t that what you are doing?I will let the law decide that. Not you. What other recourse was left to the officer after he had a taser fired at him?Still not punishable by death.However, I do feel a $5000 fine and a year in jail is way excessive just for punching someone in the face.
He punched an officer in the face, which escalated it to an aggravated misdemeanor, and ergo, felony resisting arrest.
This armchair quarterbacking is getting old. You all accuse me of lacking understanding, but it is you who REFUSE to understand.
If you feel there is no other recourse...maybe the question is,what sort of training do tbe get that they should feel there is no alternative short of lethal force For a drunk driver?
It wasn't that he was a drunk driver, it was the moment he chose to become a violent felon while resisting arrest. Had he fully cooperated with those officers, we wouldn't be in this thread lofting well-intended points over each other's heads.
What about the other path?
Logic is a factor here as well. What would you have done in the officer's shoes at that moment in time? Lets say you had the legal expertise and training that officer had. What would you have done??
You don't get time to weigh your options with a violent assailant, you either let him flee or you stop him by whatever means are available. If he presents danger to both you an the greater community, the time for exacting mercy on the assailant has passed. Your main considerations are those of the safety of you and your colleagues and of the surrounding populace.
Here is the pertinent point to me (and I can’t speak to training...neither of us can)...the person was fleeing. I had in hand his I’d, wallet, car keys. I knew where he lived. I knew his criminal record (not particularly violent, no weapons charges). I could pick him up later. I had that choice.
Moreover, you would be grossly negligent in your duties if you had a prime opportunity to capture a violent assailant and chose to pass it up.
Also, consider what Brooks may have done with the taser had he been allowed to flee.
"Running away" is largely irrelevant given the fact he chose to attack the police officer.Again...he was running AWAY. What other could they have taken?No. It would have been lethal if those prongs had attached to the officer's skull. Those tasers have a 15 foot range, and can discharge up to 50,000 volts directly into the target.He was running away as he was trying to fire it, a non lethal weapon of very limited range.He grabbed a fully charged taser and attempted to incapacitate or kill a police officer with it.A lot of people don't try to disarm the arresting officer when resisting arrest, nor do they attempt to us that officer's weapon against him. They simply want to get away. That's it, that's all.A lot of people resist arrest. Is that a death sentence?No. Not when he chose to employ violence to resist arrest. Not when he took a fully loaded taser from an officer and fled with it.. Not whe he fired said taser at the police officer. He already presented himself as a threat. All of his good behavior prior to the altercation was rendered moot.Unfortunately for you, as opposed to you living clear across the other side of the planet, thousands of miles away, I live in the state in question. Seventy miles away from Atlanta.He had already attempted to cause serious bodily injury to Rolfe by firing a taser at him. By that time, Brooks had begun to flee with a partially loaded (but no less dangerous) taser in his hand. He was brought down to end any threat would have presented to other people in the area.
I'll say it again. He had dropped the taser. A taser in non-lethal. It also has to be recharged once fired - he had no way of doing that because it was out of its holster.
Experience tells me - tells anyone - that he was no danger to any other person. He was drunk and being stupid. Not psychotic. And if a cop can't tell the difference between those behaviours, then maybe they shouldn't be in the police.
Looks like the Atlanta prosecutor and police agree with me. They made the right call.
It has nothing to do with his emotional state, it had everything to do with his compliance with lawfully given orders.
The taser in question was fully charged and was capable of firing 2 cartridges. It did not need to be charged in between shots. It is just as dangerous when the first or second cartridge is fired.
The man was a drunk driver.
Could a non lethal means of resolving the situation been used?
He did not grab his gun.
Again...is that a death sentence?
So, yes.
That is enough to stop the human heart from beating.
These arguments that the taser was non lethal are intellectually dishonest.
Upon further inspection of that video, it appears that was Rolfe's taser. Meaning the taser that Brooks had was Brosnan's. My original contention was correct. There was still one cartridge left in the taser.Furthermore, the DA announced on TV yesterday that the taser was fired twice, and the officer HAD to know that, and hence he was disarmed.
I just saw that video, the taser was fired into the air, out of view of both officers who were both on the ground after tussling with Brooks.
Meaning neither of them saw the first shot go off. In other words, they did not know the taser was spent after the second shot.
Regardless of the status of the taser, Brooks presented himself as a threat to the officers and to the community at large. He was willing to do anything to impede his own arrest. You don't let an established threat loose into the community. Sorry.
Sorry kids, you lose.
Rolfe said he tried to Tase Brooks twice with his own, to no apparent effect. And yeah, Brooks took Brosnan's.
And yes, that does mean that the Tasers issued to Atlanta cops have two shots.
And this is the same Police Dept.... These are now all subject to attempted murder... Careful where you go here...
Furthermore, the taser appears to have been fired once, not twice, meaning he was an ACTIVE threat.
I love how you just tried to spin the argument around on me. Are you that desperate?
Am I misunderstanding this? God knows, I haven't had time to sit and watch every video available of this incident frame-by-frame, Zapruder-style, the way some people claim to have done.
I'm not sure where some of these people are getting "It had already been fired, the cop knew he couldn't fire again" from. As I'm understanding it, Brooks and the two cops, Rolfe and Brosnan, were struggling on the ground. Rolfe tried to Tase Brooks and said later it seemed to have no effect. Brooks grabbed Brosnan's Taser, and ran. Rolfe chased him, Brooks twisted around to fire Brosnan's Taser at Rolfe, at which point Rolfe drew his gun and shot him, apparently within a second or two of Brooks firing the Taser.
Am I missing something, or is that essentially correct? And if it's correct, what are these people in here babbling about?
Again...he was running AWAY. What other could they have taken?No. It would have been lethal if those prongs had attached to the officer's skull. Those tasers have a 15 foot range, and can discharge up to 50,000 volts directly into the target.He was running away as he was trying to fire it, a non lethal weapon of very limited range.He grabbed a fully charged taser and attempted to incapacitate or kill a police officer with it.A lot of people don't try to disarm the arresting officer when resisting arrest, nor do they attempt to us that officer's weapon against him. They simply want to get away. That's it, that's all.A lot of people resist arrest. Is that a death sentence?No. Not when he chose to employ violence to resist arrest. Not when he took a fully loaded taser from an officer and fled with it.. Not whe he fired said taser at the police officer. He already presented himself as a threat. All of his good behavior prior to the altercation was rendered moot.Unfortunately for you, as opposed to you living clear across the other side of the planet, thousands of miles away, I live in the state in question. Seventy miles away from Atlanta.He had already attempted to cause serious bodily injury to Rolfe by firing a taser at him. By that time, Brooks had begun to flee with a partially loaded (but no less dangerous) taser in his hand. He was brought down to end any threat would have presented to other people in the area.
I'll say it again. He had dropped the taser. A taser in non-lethal. It also has to be recharged once fired - he had no way of doing that because it was out of its holster.
Experience tells me - tells anyone - that he was no danger to any other person. He was drunk and being stupid. Not psychotic. And if a cop can't tell the difference between those behaviours, then maybe they shouldn't be in the police.
Looks like the Atlanta prosecutor and police agree with me. They made the right call.
It has nothing to do with his emotional state, it had everything to do with his compliance with lawfully given orders.
The taser in question was fully charged and was capable of firing 2 cartridges. It did not need to be charged in between shots. It is just as dangerous when the first or second cartridge is fired.
The man was a drunk driver.
Could a non lethal means of resolving the situation been used?
He did not grab his gun.
Again...is that a death sentence?
So, yes.
That is enough to stop the human heart from beating.
These arguments that the taser was non lethal are intellectually dishonest.
Coyote slow and try thinking it out, Brooks as a DRUNK man, broke numerous laws, starting with his resisting and assaulting the police, evading arrest, shooting a projectile taser gun he stole from the police, at one of the police men.
He made it clear he was now a threat to the public for various modes of violence he produced, stop trying to rationalize his idiotic violent behavior.
Again...he was running AWAY. What other could they have taken?No. It would have been lethal if those prongs had attached to the officer's skull. Those tasers have a 15 foot range, and can discharge up to 50,000 volts directly into the target.He was running away as he was trying to fire it, a non lethal weapon of very limited range.He grabbed a fully charged taser and attempted to incapacitate or kill a police officer with it.A lot of people don't try to disarm the arresting officer when resisting arrest, nor do they attempt to us that officer's weapon against him. They simply want to get away. That's it, that's all.A lot of people resist arrest. Is that a death sentence?No. Not when he chose to employ violence to resist arrest. Not when he took a fully loaded taser from an officer and fled with it.. Not whe he fired said taser at the police officer. He already presented himself as a threat. All of his good behavior prior to the altercation was rendered moot.Unfortunately for you, as opposed to you living clear across the other side of the planet, thousands of miles away, I live in the state in question. Seventy miles away from Atlanta.He had already attempted to cause serious bodily injury to Rolfe by firing a taser at him. By that time, Brooks had begun to flee with a partially loaded (but no less dangerous) taser in his hand. He was brought down to end any threat would have presented to other people in the area.
I'll say it again. He had dropped the taser. A taser in non-lethal. It also has to be recharged once fired - he had no way of doing that because it was out of its holster.
Experience tells me - tells anyone - that he was no danger to any other person. He was drunk and being stupid. Not psychotic. And if a cop can't tell the difference between those behaviours, then maybe they shouldn't be in the police.
Looks like the Atlanta prosecutor and police agree with me. They made the right call.
It has nothing to do with his emotional state, it had everything to do with his compliance with lawfully given orders.
The taser in question was fully charged and was capable of firing 2 cartridges. It did not need to be charged in between shots. It is just as dangerous when the first or second cartridge is fired.
The man was a drunk driver.
Could a non lethal means of resolving the situation been used?
He did not grab his gun.
Again...is that a death sentence?
So, yes.
That is enough to stop the human heart from beating.
These arguments that the taser was non lethal are intellectually dishonest.
Coyote slow and try thinking it out, Brooks as a DRUNK man, broke numerous laws, starting with his resisting and assaulting the police, evading arrest, shooting a projectile taser gun he stole from the police, at one of the police men.
He made it clear he was now a threat to the public for various modes of violence he produced, stop trying to rationalize his idiotic violent behavior.
Actions of one event...directed solely at evading arrest, directed at the police...make him a threat to the public?
Well shoot...using that logic, Clive Bundy and his gang should have been shot down, not heroized.
Sorry.... the whole purpose of the taser introduction to the police force was because the taser WAS NOT deadly...No, he didn't. The cops KNEW the taser was empty, out of juice, because it had already been discharged twice. He was not a deadly threat to the officers...And they both knew this....
Sorry, the willingness to use deadly or injurious force against the police made him a threat, not only to the police, but to the surrounding population. If he had not been shot, he would have continued to flee, using whatever means were at his disposal to resist his arrest. You cannot presume he would not have used more violence to do so had he survived.
Willingness to use any violence in the process of resisting your arrest makes you a threat. Your argument is invalid.
It's just not punching "someone". It is punching a cop, which is far more serious.However, I do feel a $5000 fine and a year in jail is way excessive just for punching someone in the face.
Sorry.... the whole purpose of the taser introduction to the police force was because the taser WAS NOT deadly...No, he didn't. The cops KNEW the taser was empty, out of juice, because it had already been discharged twice. He was not a deadly threat to the officers...And they both knew this....
Sorry, the willingness to use deadly or injurious force against the police made him a threat, not only to the police, but to the surrounding population. If he had not been shot, he would have continued to flee, using whatever means were at his disposal to resist his arrest. You cannot presume he would not have used more violence to do so had he survived.
Willingness to use any violence in the process of resisting your arrest makes you a threat. Your argument is invalid.
That's what we all in the public were told. That is our mindset on tasers.
Even I, who is not a gun lover, would fire a taser....
So why you keep saying he used deadly force against the officers, is a fabrication of yours... it's simply not true....?
I believe the cop who murdered George Floyd should go to prison.Bump.
Again...he was running AWAY. What other could they have taken?No. It would have been lethal if those prongs had attached to the officer's skull. Those tasers have a 15 foot range, and can discharge up to 50,000 volts directly into the target.He was running away as he was trying to fire it, a non lethal weapon of very limited range.He grabbed a fully charged taser and attempted to incapacitate or kill a police officer with it.A lot of people don't try to disarm the arresting officer when resisting arrest, nor do they attempt to us that officer's weapon against him. They simply want to get away. That's it, that's all.A lot of people resist arrest. Is that a death sentence?No. Not when he chose to employ violence to resist arrest. Not when he took a fully loaded taser from an officer and fled with it.. Not whe he fired said taser at the police officer. He already presented himself as a threat. All of his good behavior prior to the altercation was rendered moot.Unfortunately for you, as opposed to you living clear across the other side of the planet, thousands of miles away, I live in the state in question. Seventy miles away from Atlanta.He had already attempted to cause serious bodily injury to Rolfe by firing a taser at him. By that time, Brooks had begun to flee with a partially loaded (but no less dangerous) taser in his hand. He was brought down to end any threat would have presented to other people in the area.
I'll say it again. He had dropped the taser. A taser in non-lethal. It also has to be recharged once fired - he had no way of doing that because it was out of its holster.
Experience tells me - tells anyone - that he was no danger to any other person. He was drunk and being stupid. Not psychotic. And if a cop can't tell the difference between those behaviours, then maybe they shouldn't be in the police.
Looks like the Atlanta prosecutor and police agree with me. They made the right call.
It has nothing to do with his emotional state, it had everything to do with his compliance with lawfully given orders.
The taser in question was fully charged and was capable of firing 2 cartridges. It did not need to be charged in between shots. It is just as dangerous when the first or second cartridge is fired.
The man was a drunk driver.
Could a non lethal means of resolving the situation been used?
He did not grab his gun.
Again...is that a death sentence?
So, yes.
That is enough to stop the human heart from beating.
These arguments that the taser was non lethal are intellectually dishonest.
Coyote slow and try thinking it out, Brooks as a DRUNK man, broke numerous laws, starting with his resisting and assaulting the police, evading arrest, shooting a projectile taser gun he stole from the police, at one of the police men.
He made it clear he was now a threat to the public for various modes of violence he produced, stop trying to rationalize his idiotic violent behavior.
Actions of one event...directed solely at evading arrest, directed at the police...make him a threat to the public?
Well shoot...using that logic, Clive Bundy and his gang should have been shot down, not heroized.
Now you are just embarrassing yourself, you keep ignoring his physical assault on two men, steals a firearm which he uses with intent to cause serious injury,, evading a legal, proper arrest, while he is drunk, all while he is trying to run away, the man was clearly a danger in the area.
Violence, violence and yet more violence, you can't explain them away for his trying to evade a legal arrest.
I think he did it because he realize he was violating his probation, which means a good chance he goes to prison, that makes him dangerous.
Again...he was running AWAY. What other could they have taken?No. It would have been lethal if those prongs had attached to the officer's skull. Those tasers have a 15 foot range, and can discharge up to 50,000 volts directly into the target.He was running away as he was trying to fire it, a non lethal weapon of very limited range.He grabbed a fully charged taser and attempted to incapacitate or kill a police officer with it.A lot of people don't try to disarm the arresting officer when resisting arrest, nor do they attempt to us that officer's weapon against him. They simply want to get away. That's it, that's all.A lot of people resist arrest. Is that a death sentence?No. Not when he chose to employ violence to resist arrest. Not when he took a fully loaded taser from an officer and fled with it.. Not whe he fired said taser at the police officer. He already presented himself as a threat. All of his good behavior prior to the altercation was rendered moot.Unfortunately for you, as opposed to you living clear across the other side of the planet, thousands of miles away, I live in the state in question. Seventy miles away from Atlanta.He had already attempted to cause serious bodily injury to Rolfe by firing a taser at him. By that time, Brooks had begun to flee with a partially loaded (but no less dangerous) taser in his hand. He was brought down to end any threat would have presented to other people in the area.
I'll say it again. He had dropped the taser. A taser in non-lethal. It also has to be recharged once fired - he had no way of doing that because it was out of its holster.
Experience tells me - tells anyone - that he was no danger to any other person. He was drunk and being stupid. Not psychotic. And if a cop can't tell the difference between those behaviours, then maybe they shouldn't be in the police.
Looks like the Atlanta prosecutor and police agree with me. They made the right call.
It has nothing to do with his emotional state, it had everything to do with his compliance with lawfully given orders.
The taser in question was fully charged and was capable of firing 2 cartridges. It did not need to be charged in between shots. It is just as dangerous when the first or second cartridge is fired.
The man was a drunk driver.
Could a non lethal means of resolving the situation been used?
He did not grab his gun.
Again...is that a death sentence?
So, yes.
That is enough to stop the human heart from beating.
These arguments that the taser was non lethal are intellectually dishonest.
Coyote slow and try thinking it out, Brooks as a DRUNK man, broke numerous laws, starting with his resisting and assaulting the police, evading arrest, shooting a projectile taser gun he stole from the police, at one of the police men.
He made it clear he was now a threat to the public for various modes of violence he produced, stop trying to rationalize his idiotic violent behavior.
Actions of one event...directed solely at evading arrest, directed at the police...make him a threat to the public?
Well shoot...using that logic, Clive Bundy and his gang should have been shot down, not heroized.
Now you are just embarrassing yourself, you keep ignoring his physical assault on two men, steals a firearm which he uses with intent to cause serious injury,, evading a legal, proper arrest, while he is drunk, all while he is trying to run away, the man was clearly a danger in the area.
Violence, violence and yet more violence, you can't explain them away for his trying to evade a legal arrest.
I think he did it because he realize he was violating his probation, which means a good chance he goes to prison, that makes him dangerous.
He struggled with officers...not generic men
He stole a taser. Not a gun. If you think they are equivalent, then why do police need guns?
It doesn't have to be.It is not a gun.A taser is classified as a firearm under Georgia law. See OP.A taser is not a gun.