Posted on 06/17/2020 1:06:11 PM PDT by buckalfa
Another political show trial, just like the Arbery thing.
This is probably a calculated charge to give the mayor of Atlanta some breathing room - right now she can’t breathe - and save her job.
“Running toward someone else with a knife or lethal weapon and his back is facing you?? How’s that?”
Precisely, sir knight. It makes no sense.
We’re analyzing your statement, which is: “Shooting someone in the back is unjustified, unless they were charging at someone with the intent to maim/kill.”
The imagery is of a man charging someone with his back turned to the man he’s attacking. And you state that shooting this man in the back is unjustified. I’m trying to imagine such a situation.
If you admit to sniffing the whisky cork, your statement is understandable.
Thanks. Jntrees is some kind of troll who occasionally pops up to spout useless nonsense. Unfortunately my last post was redacted. Anyone with half a brain can see this was a justified shoot. I guess that is asking to much of him.
I think he can get an acquittal. Everybody knows, you don’t friggin shoot cops. Even if it was a taser, how does the officer in that frame of mind know to a certainty that he didn’t turn and point a real firearm? Sure, the taser was stolen but that doesn’t mean he couldn’t have another weapon.
He physically assaulted the police, stole a weapon, ran, turned and fired. Any reasonable person with a firearm would probably shoot back, badge or no badge. And, even a taser is still potentially fatal to the officer or to bystanders. Almost 200 people have been killed by tasers.
It’s very sad that this man was killed. Deaths like these are tragic. But the facts are, he appeared to be drunk, and he fired a weapon at a cop. I think even the good people of Atlanta can understand this. I wish he didn’t die. I wish he just took the drunk driving charge, went to some AA meetings and got on with his life. But I hope it doesn’t come to a politically motivated prosecution.
Never seen the poster before , but you were correct 100%
I know what to think. All was okay until the perp resisted arrest and went and grabbed the stun gun and tried to use it on the cops. This was NOT a murder. Those cops had no way of knowing this guy would get all crazy.
“Jntrees is some kind of troll who occasionally pops up to spout useless nonsense.”
I noticed that and commented.
I assumed anybody who fired any type weapon at a cop would be fired upon immediately.
Silly me.
Atlanta fired police officers in the last week or so because they used lethal force (tasers) against kids in a car.
So, Atlanta already set precedent that use of tasers is lethal force. So when this perp stole the police officer’s taser and fired that taser at the police officer, he was using my lethal force against the officer. Lethal force can be returned at that point.
“Running toward someone else with a knife or lethal weapon and his back is facing you?? How’s that?”
Precisely, sir knight. It makes no sense.
We’re analyzing your statement, which is: “Shooting someone in the back is unjustified, unless they were charging at someone with the intent to maim/kill.”
The imagery is of a man charging someone with his back turned to the man he’s attacking. And you state that shooting this man in the back is unjustified. I’m trying to imagine such a situation.
If you admit to sniffing the whisky cork, your statement is understandable
I can try to put it into terms that you can understand, I’ll have to think like a 6 year old I suppose.
Suppose someone is running away from you. You will see his back side—you following so far?
That same person has a machete and is running toward someone else (his back is still all that you see), you still with me? Remember, he is moving away from you (you, who is armed with a gun) and towards someone else. You fear that he is going to chop that person up, so you dump some rounds into his back ( remember, he is moving away from you still), now do you understand.
I can try crayons if you think it would help...
which will be the argument for the defendant , and yes you made a good point thank you.
They were fired for and charged with aggravated assault, pointing or aiming a gun, simple battery and criminal damage to property. Not for using lethal force. Since a Taser is not classified as a lethal weapon in Georgia it's hard to see how they could have been charged with that.
If Brooks did miss a meeting with his probation officer, there may well have been a warrant out but the facts known to the public suggests a warrant wasn't in play insofar as the officers were concerned. Brooks, of course, had good reason to worry about being arrested.
So, we agree, finally.
Once again, here’s your statement: ““Shooting someone in the back is unjustified, unless they were charging at someone with the intent to maim/kill.”
The black thug charged the cop, so the other cop was completely justified in shooting the attacker in the back.
Based on a single quick view of the video, Officer 2 was the shooter.
Also which of those two officers had his taser stolen, and was it the officer with the taser stolen that shot the perp?
It appears Officer 1 relinquished his taser. It appears from reports that the first officer on the scene was a veteran of approximately 1 year (rookie?) and he called the second officer for the DUI examination.
We probably both ought to go back and study the several videos that are available. {;^)
Once again, here’s your statement: ““Shooting someone in the back is unjustified, unless they were charging at someone with the intent to maim/kill.”
The black thug charged the cop, so the other cop was completely justified in shooting the attacker in the back.
“The black thug...” I knew you had it in you.
I don’t know what reality you are currently living in but to say the “black thug charged the cop..” in totally and completely INSANE man. You try to make your point with outright LIES! He didn’t charge the cop, he was running AWAY from the cops.
What are you smoking tonight??
Don’t know—misposting?
Not that I know of.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.