Cop in America doing a bad job, again

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.
 
Shane88 said:
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?
Click to expand...
Clearly was an idiot. But I'm sympathetic to him possibly being so drunk, that he had no clue what he was doing. And of course, he didn't deserve to die as plenty have already mentioned.
 
How does the data compare between the US and other Western nations with incidents like this?
(When a suspect resists and the police shoot him dead)

I feel like only in the US does this stuff constantly escalate to the point that the suspect gets killed. People resist in Western Europe too but I'm quite confident they don't get killed as much as people in the US.

Is it the fear for civilian-owned guns?
 
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...

Sorry I'm not sure why you're getting worked up by what I've said?

In answer to your question the law applies to everyone so yes. Any person can use lethal force should it meet the criteria I've outlined above.
 
If someone beats me up and runs away and I pick up a gun and shoot them in the back as they are fleeing, I'm getting arrested that very day.

He left his car there. They knew who he was. It's ok to admit you got your ass beat, and follow up and arrest the perp the next day. Then charge him with the crime of resisting arrest and assault and so on.

The officer was fired justifiably so but I'm not sure why so many are comfortable with the idea that in a system where it takes the death of an individual to realize, "oh that's a bad cop", said system can be reformed by just removing the bad cops. Which again, are only identified when they kill someone.
 
Man of Leisure said:
Nah, I'm almost certain this wouldn't have been the case. This happened in Atlanta, not in podunk Mayberry.

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.
I think you know that's not what I was implying. Didn't realize they shot him 3 times though. That's bad.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter, I've witnessed the difference growing up. The perceived threat from a suspect it heightened by the race of the suspect.

Erm no. Firing your weapon is an option if you believe the suspect to be a mortal danger to yourself, colleague, or the general public.
Not acceptable firing on an unarmed person, who was suspected, key work being suspected of committing a non-violent crime. Whilst he was running away with his back turned. I believe he was sitting in the passenger seat of the car so it is not even clear if he even committed the crime of DUI.

Now he did resist arrest, so yes this is a crime, one which validates the force displayed by the officer whilst he was running away NO!
 
VorZakone said:
How does the data compare between the US and other Western nations with incidents like this?
(When a suspect resists and the police shoot him dead)

I feel like only in the US does this stuff constantly escalate to the point that the suspect gets killed. People resist in Western Europe too but I'm quite confident they don't get killed as much as people in the US.

Is it the fear for civilian-owned guns?
Click to expand...

In the UK police don't standardly carry firearms (not counting tazers), but then again neither do the public.

The UK does have an issue with deaths in custody though or during arrest. Take the case of Julian Cole, not as bad as the US.
However, the situation is always going to be less heightened when you don't need to worry about firearms. Which is why the gun laws in the US to me are crazy
 
adexkola said:
If someone beats me up and runs away and I pick up a gun and shoot them in the back as they are fleeing, I'm getting arrested that very day.

He left his car there. They knew who he was. It's ok to admit you got your ass beat, and follow up and arrest the perp the next day. Then charge him with the crime of resisting arrest and assault and so on.

The officer was fired justifiably so but I'm not sure why so many are comfortable with the idea that in a system where it takes the death of an individual to realize, "oh that's a bad cop", said system can be reformed by just removing the bad cops. Which again, are only identified when they kill someone.
Click to expand...


This officer will sue for unlawful termination and get a big sum.

Drunk, arrest resisiting guy is running away with a firearm. That is simply not safe and you cant risk that sort of stuff. It is putting the lives of civilians in danger.

There should never be any tolerance on resisting arrest or stealing a firearm.
 
Cassidy said:
It doesn't matter, I've witnessed the difference growing up. The perceived threat from a suspect it heightened by the race of the suspect.

Erm no. Firing your weapon is an option if you believe the suspect to be a mortal danger to yourself, colleague, or the general public.
Not acceptable firing on an unarmed person, who was suspected, key work being suspected of committing a non-violent crime. Whilst he was running away with his back turned. I believe he was sitting in the passenger seat of the car so it is not even clear if he even committed the crime of DUI.

Now he did resist arrest, so yes this is a crime, one which validates the force displayed by the officer whilst he was running away NO!
Click to expand...

How is a drunk man who resists arrest, fires a taser at the police roaming around the streets not a threat?
 
villain said:
Click to expand...


I am thinking about anyone who says he deserved to die. I cant think of anyone. I dont even know if that cop thinks that.

However this guy was an idiot. Its sad. But you dont do what he did and expect to live.

Had he took a civilian hostage then what? Easy to share tweets and mash your keyboard but the real world is different
 
Just so you all know, tasers have an effective range of about 20 feet. Now you have a quantitative element to measure the police response here.
 
shamans said:
I am thinking about anyone who says he deserved to die. I cant think of anyone. I dont even know if that cop thinks that.

However this guy was an idiot. Its sad. But you dont do what he did and expect to live.

Had he took a civilian hostage then what? Easy to share tweets and mash your keyboard but the real world is different
Click to expand...

What if your dad had never met your mum? Hypothetical escalations do nothing but to reinforce the problem.
 
shamans said:
The reason a drunk driver is pulled over is because they can harm someone else.

Would you feel safe with that man near you with a taser in his hand? I can tell you I wouldn't.
Click to expand...
He was asleep in the passenger side of a parked vehicle.
 
shamans said:
I am thinking about anyone who says he deserved to die. I cant think of anyone. I dont even know if that cop thinks that.

However this guy was an idiot. Its sad. But you dont do what he did and expect to live.

Had he took a civilian hostage then what? Easy to share tweets and mash your keyboard but the real world is different
Click to expand...

It's America, I guarantee that there are thousands of drunk people in possession of weapons more deadly than a taser every night.

It doesn't justify his death, especially when the cops actually had him accosted and he wasn't under arrest in the first place.

Also don't bring hypothetical questions in a situation where a man was killed, its classless.
 
villain said:
It's America, I guarantee that there are thousands of drunk people in possession of weapons more deadly than a taser every night.

It doesn't justify his death, especially when the cops actually had him accosted and he wasn't under arrest in the first place.

Also don't bring hypothetical questions in a situation where a man was killed, its classless.
Click to expand...

And if any of those drunk people with guns resist arrest in such a manner they will get shot. Its for the safety of citizens. This man was clearly not stable. The cops in this case were respectful and very cooperative.

You simply dont run away like that. Like I said real life isnt Twitter
 
shamans said:
And if any of those drunk people with guns resist arrest in such a manner they will get shot. Its for the safety of citizens. This man was clearly not stable. The cops in this case were respectful and very cooperative.

You simply dont run away like that. Like I said real life isnt Twitter
Click to expand...

More hypothetical statements being made.
He is a citizen - this idea that a 'criminal' is lesser than those who haven't been convicted of anything is one of the reasons why police brutality is as rife as it is. And even then - the man wasn't a criminal, he wasn't arrested, charged, or convicted - police officers shouldn't be able to be judge, jury & executioner, especially if a man is sleeping in his own car.

Your continued non-approval of twitter/social media doesn't change any of the above, and it doesn't justify the police killing someone, so i'm not sure why you keep bringing it up as if it means anything.
 
shamans said:
How is a drunk man who resists arrest, fires a taser at the police roaming around the streets not a threat?
Click to expand...

1. We don't know if he was drunk (maybe we do now) but as far as I know we don't know that.
2. Who are you perceiving him to be a threat to? Himself ok yes, the general public how?
3. From your other posts, I see you have not followed what happened, as he was not pulled over. He was asleep in the passenger seat of a vehicle (that is not a crime)
4. He did not have a gun

But more to the point even if he was drunk, and he did get pulled over, and he did run away. What danger to the general public is he really? There is no imminent threat to life, there is no reason to suspect he is going to harm anyone.
So in that sense, there is no reason to use deadly force and shoot the man in the back whilst running away.

Let's also address something because I think it is very important. Even if someone has committed a crime or is suspected of committing a crime, that still gives no right to take their life.
The only reason for an officer to kill a suspect is if they feel either their own life is in mortal danger or if there is an imminent threat to the lives of the general public.

Committing a crime does not mean you should die at the hands of the police.
 
This demonstrates one of the major issues - fragile ego. The cop can’t handle that the guy is ‘winning’ and in the right so he’s desperately trying to show who’s boss because he knows he has a lot of power and backup behind him.

A good cop would have said to himself, or even out loud, that he doesn’t want to escalate the situation so will write him a ticket and be on his way. It’s clear as day the guy isn’t suspicious and is just frustrated that he’s been intimidatingly tailgated for a while before being pulled over, a shitty technique that I’ve even experienced over here.

 
Last edited:
@Cassidy Don't really wanna get in this with you because in general, I agree with your points.
Cassidy said:
It doesn't matter, I've witnessed the difference growing up. The perceived threat from a suspect it heightened by the race of the suspect.
Click to expand...
My Atlanta vs Mayberry comparison was in response to redped saying if this was a white person he's pretty sure they would have just gotten him home safely. I simply don't think that'd be the case. If you're suspected of DUI in a big city, you're getting arrested regardless of color.
Cassidy said:
Erm no. Firing your weapon is an option if you believe the suspect to be a mortal danger to yourself, colleague, or the general public.
Not acceptable firing on an unarmed person, who was suspected, key work being suspected of committing a non-violent crime. Whilst he was running away with his back turned. I believe he was sitting in the passenger seat of the car so it is not even clear if he even committed the crime of DUI.
Click to expand...
But he was armed. Unless you're not considering the taser as a weapon? As for shooting him in the back, yes that's fecking bad. Didn't realize that's what happened when I first saw the video. The passenger seat is confusing. If he wasn't the driver, then why would he even be arrested?
Cassidy said:
Now he did resist arrest, so yes this is a crime, one which validates the force displayed by the officer whilst he was running away NO!
Click to expand...
Of course not.

Gonna leave this thread now. Getting uncomfortable with @shamans semi-agreeing with me.
 
VeevaVee said:
This demonstrates one of the major issues - fragile ego. The cop can’t handle that the guy is ‘winning’ and in the right so he’s desperately trying to show who’s boss because he knows he has a lot of power and backup behind him.

Click to expand...


The guy should've just gotten out of his car, allowed the cop to run his plates, taken the ticket and then driven off. Instead he tried to become a social media hero by attempting to vlog himself out of routine stop, and in the process probably got arrested. Some people are really dumb.
 
I've only been asked to get out of the car once during a traffic violation. And I was going a lot more than 5mph over the limit at the time.
 
Raoul said:
The guy should've just gotten out of his car, allowed the cop to run his plates, taken the ticket and then driven off. Instead he tried to become a social media hero by attempting to vlog himself out of routine stop, and in the process probably got arrested. Some people are really dumb.
Click to expand...

Thereby allowing power hungry cops to continue with their madness.
 
Raoul said:
The guy should've just gotten out of his car, allowed the cop to run his plates, taken the ticket and then driven off. Instead he tried to become a social media hero by attempting to vlog himself out of routine stop, and in the process probably got arrested. Some people are really dumb.
Click to expand...

Even though I agree with you. The officer attempted to pepper spray him which was totally out of order.
By law an officer can only order you out of the car if the traffic stop was genuine. I.E if he has proof he was speeding.
 
Raoul said:
The guy should've just gotten out of his car, allowed the cop to run his plates, taken the ticket and then driven off. Instead he tried to become a social media hero by attempting to vlog himself out of routine stop, and in the process probably got arrested. Some people are really dumb.
Click to expand...
Cop was being a complete dickhead there. While I sorta agree with you that he didn't need to escalate the situation by refusing to get out and continue filming. But from what I could tell, the cop was the one at fault here and could have just written him a ticket. Sad to say, things prolly would have gone down differently if the driver was black.
 
Man of Leisure said:
Cop was being a complete dickhead there. While I sorta agree with you that he didn't need to escalate the situation by refusing to get out and continue filming. But from what I could tell, the cop was the one at fault here and could have just written him a ticket. Sad to say, things prolly would have gone down differently if the driver was black.
Click to expand...
Or if his pepper spray canister wasn't empty.

He had ample time to calm down and de-escalate, yet the first thing he does when his backup arrives is to ask if he's got pepper spray. He clearly wanted to get at this guy and hurt him, and not in a heat-of-the-moment-way. Just in a 'feck you for not respecting my authority' way.
 
Man of Leisure said:
Cop was being a complete dickhead there. While I sorta agree with you that he didn't need to escalate the situation by refusing to get out and continue filming. But from what I could tell, the cop was the one at fault here and could have just written him a ticket. Sad to say, things prolly would have gone down differently if the driver was black.
Click to expand...

He seemed inexperienced and somewhat intimidated that he could wind up on social media. Adding to the comedy of errors, he forgot to refill his pepperspray.
 
Cassidy said:
Even though I agree with you. The officer attempted to pepper spray him which was totally out of order.
By law an officer can only order you out of the car if the traffic stop was genuine. I.E if he has proof he was speeding.
Click to expand...

Technically true, but cops have a lot of leeway and can always claim a routine traffic violation (illegal change of lanes, swerving etc) to justify getting pulled over. The guy inside the car made things exponentially worse by not cooperating.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.