• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Police shooting in Atlanta aka "Sir, this is a Wendy's drive-through"

It's okay for the government to shoot an unarmed, drunk criminal in the back when he is running away, killing him, instead of chasing him because the government employees eat so many donuts they can't chase a drunk guy down, gang up on him, and handcuff him or simply lie to him that they are taking him to see hookers at a Brazilian carnival.

I will excuse whatever these government employees do so long as it results in injury or death to a black guy.

[/conservolibertarian]
 
Protesters break out windows, set fire to inside of Wendy’s where Rayshard Brooks was killed

I bet Jarhyn will come along any minute now to thugsplain to us how vandalizing and torching a Wendy's is justified because they are an evil corporation akin to Nazis and besides, it's their own fault for calling the cops because some drunk passed out in their drive-through ...

WSB is wrong for calling these vandals "protesters". They are nothing but a bunch of thugs and all of them should get a trip to Fulton County Jail.

NBC wokester refers to protester violence as "the energy in the streets". I doubt Jarhyn's thugsplaining can outdo the doubleplusgood newspeak euphemisms pouring out of the liberal MSM
 
Protesters break out windows, set fire to inside of Wendy’s where Rayshard Brooks was killed

I bet Jarhyn will come along any minute now to thugsplain to us how vandalizing and torching a Wendy's is justified because they are an evil corporation akin to Nazis and besides, it's their own fault for calling the cops because some drunk passed out in their drive-through ...

WSB is wrong for calling these vandals "protesters". They are nothing but a bunch of thugs and all of them should get a trip to Fulton County Jail.

NBC wokester refers to protester violence as "the energy in the streets".
I doubt Jahryn's thugsplaining can outdo the doubleplusgood newspeak euphemisms pouring out of the liberal MSM

...and here's another one^

You are using ad homs against Jarhyn because you cannot defend your immoral, murderous position. The bottom line is that killing the guy was unnecessary, but you don't care. You will never, ever admit it either because you got your bros as crutches in the thread.

Disgusting.
 
Imo, the violence, the sacking and the resignation seem unnecessary and unjustified in this case.

Beyond that, there is definitely a problem with policing if police feel that they need to shoot someone in these circumstances.

The backlash and the police response to the incident likely have a lot to do with the fact that tensions are currently so heightened.
 
Protesters break out windows, set fire to inside of Wendy’s where Rayshard Brooks was killed

I bet Jarhyn will come along any minute now to thugsplain to us how vandalizing and torching a Wendy's is justified because they are an evil corporation akin to Nazis and besides, it's their own fault for calling the cops because some drunk passed out in their drive-through ...

WSB is wrong for calling these vandals "protesters". They are nothing but a bunch of thugs and all of them should get a trip to Fulton County Jail.

NBC wokester refers to protester violence as "the energy in the streets".
I doubt Jarhyn's thugsplaining can outdo the doubleplusgood newspeak euphemisms pouring out of the liberal MSM

...and here's another one^

You are using ad homs against Jarhyn because you cannot defend your immoral, murderous position. The bottom line is that killing the guy was unnecessary, but you don't care. You will never, ever admit it either because you got your bros as crutches in the thread.

Disgusting.

Um...that post was about protester violence.
 
If police officers are armed with tasers and fire arms, then tasers are considered non-lethal weapons. IMO, a non-lethal threat does not necessitate an immediate lethal reaction.

Why not? Tasers incapacitate (which would allow the perp to steal the gun as well) and they can be deadly in some circumstances.
Is there point here? Tasers are clearly considered non-lethal weapons in the hands of the police. He had not incapacitated anyone, and he had no lethal weapon.

As others have pointed out, he fired and missed with the taser. Which means he was no longer a lethal threat.
 
Imo, the violence, the sacking and the resignation seem unnecessary and unjustified in this case.

Beyond that, there is definitely a problem with policing if police feel that they need to shoot someone in these circumstances.

The backlash likely has more to do with the fact that tensions are currently so heightened.

The main point is that no one should be killed by police after falling asleep in their car. Our police are obviously horribly untrained.
 
He'd already fired the taser so it was no longer a threat.
What are you talking about? Mulltishot tasers have existed for years. So Rayshard could definitely have fired the taser again.

The only reason the cop had for killing the man was that it was the only way to stop him from running away. That's the only reason.
With a weapon he stole off police. Right after he has assaulted police.

Obviously they would have been able to apprehend him eventually since they had his car and knew who he was. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that police are being taught that killing someone is an acceptable means for accomplishing a task in the performance of their duties. And there is no need to weigh the value of that human life with respect to them accomplishing that task.

I suspect that in many cases this has something to do with racism. But sure as shit it's a systemic problem.
Since white people get shot by police too, I call BS.
Where race comes into it is that when a white guy gets shot by police at a fast food restaurant, other white people don't immediately torch it in his honor.

If the only way to control it is to fire some officers and burn down a few businesses then so be it.
Arson is never acceptable!
And police officers should not be fired, much less charged, for defending themselves.

This is a war against an endemic problem within our police departments just as sure as we are in a war against the COVID-19 pandemic. I don't condone the destruction of private property. Think of it as collateral damage. Innocent people often get hurt when the survival of a society is at stake.

You just said "so be it". So you really condone it even if you say you don't. It's not "collateral damage" either as these rioters intentionally torch these buildings. They need to be brought to justice.
Oh, and if you are about to be arrested for DUI, do not resist, punch an officer, steal a taser, and shoot said taser. That's a recipe for getting shot whether you are black, white or purple.
 
Is there point here?
Yes.

Tasers are clearly considered non-lethal weapons in the hands of the police.
Even if they are, they are still weapons that can incapacitate. And an incapacitated police officer can easily be relived of their very lethal handgun.
Rayshard could have easily avoided all this by not acting like a thug. It's on him.

He had not incapacitated anyone, and he had no lethal weapon.
He tried to incapacitate the police officer he shot the taser at, and he previously punched a police officer. He has clearly demonstrated intention to harm police, and they are allowed to defend themselves.
The fired cop should sue the department for wrongful termination. Police officers should not be chips in mayor's political games.

As others have pointed out, he fired and missed with the taser. Which means he was no longer a lethal threat.
Police tasers are not one-shot weapons.
 
...and here's another one^

You are using ad homs against Jarhyn because you cannot defend your immoral, murderous position. The bottom line is that killing the guy was unnecessary, but you don't care. You will never, ever admit it either because you got your bros as crutches in the thread.

Disgusting.

Um...that post was about protester violence.

No, it was about Jarhyn. Nice try, though.
 
Police should not kill black people when they don't have to because black lives matter.
Just black people? Black lives matter most?

Your bizarre objections to an axiomatic statement and your continued obfuscations of this plain truth do not in any way detract from a rational understanding of it. You can jump up and down and say criminals or black thugs or whatever, but it doesn't change the basic moral truth. So, please do try again, this time with something more well thought out or just give up because you really can't argue against logic. So here we are again:
Police should not kill black people when they don't have to because black lives matter.
 
Protesters break out windows, set fire to inside of Wendy’s where Rayshard Brooks was killed

I bet Jarhyn will come along any minute now to thugsplain to us how vandalizing and torching a Wendy's is justified because they are an evil corporation akin to Nazis and besides, it's their own fault for calling the cops because some drunk passed out in their drive-through ...

WSB is wrong for calling these vandals "protesters". They are nothing but a bunch of thugs and all of them should get a trip to Fulton County Jail.

NBC wokester refers to protester violence as "the energy in the streets".
I doubt Jahryn's thugsplaining can outdo the doubleplusgood newspeak euphemisms pouring out of the liberal MSM
Thugs, protestors, coloreds, vandals, freedom marchers, niggers, nigger-lovers, liberals, progressives, antifa, humans, wokeds... Call it whatever the fuck floats your moral superiority boat. Be as snide and smug as you think you deserve. Names don't matter.
Change matters.
Peaceful protests did not bring it.
Violent protests did not bring it.
Looting did not bring it.
Maybe 'expensive' will bring it.
As we saw this year, nothing changes without a threat to Big Money.
Maybe if big chains cannot count on the cops to protect their interests, they'll force change. Burn down Wendy's because the cops were stupid, there? Sure. People are angry and hurt and don't see that they have a voice where it counts. So, make it a problem for those who do.
Bruce Wayne had no problem with Superman until after a super-fight knocked over buildings andhis deductible went up.
 
Rayshard Brooks marked daughter's 8th birthday before police shot him

Rayshard Brooks shooting: Use of deadly force by Atlanta police condemned - BBC News
Also on Saturday, Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms announced that Atlanta police chief Erika Shields had resigned.

"While there may be debate as to whether this was an appropriate use of deadly force, I firmly believe that there is a clear distinction between what you can do and what you should do," Ms Bottoms said. "I do not believe that this was a justified use of deadly force."

Representative James Clyburn, a South Carolina Democrat who is House majority whip, told CNN on Sunday. "This did not call for lethal force and I don't know what's in the culture that would make this guy do that."
Body cam footage of Rayshard Brooks’ death shows calm, then chaos - YouTube

Atlanta shooting: Possible charges in Rayshard Brooks' killing could come this week, DA says - CNN
"(Brooks) did not seem to present any kind of threat to anyone, and so the fact that it would escalate to his death just seems unreasonable," DA Paul Howard told CNN's Fredricka Whitfield on Sunday.

"It just seems like this is not the kind of conversation and incident that should have led to someone's death."
 
The officers checked him for weapons, found none. He failed a breathalyzer, so they tried to arrest him even though he was not driving while drunk. He resisted, broke free and ran, they shot him in the back.

DUI merely requires being in control of the vehicle while drunk. While there are times that is wrongful (drunks sleeping it off in their car with no intent to go anywhere and some other edge cases--I would modify the law that it doesn't apply in the parking lot of a drinking establishment, nor on one's own property) the guy passed out in the drive thru should be guilty of DUI--he obviously drove there drunk.

However, after the initial stuff another video showed up. This appears to be a justified shooting. The cops were chasing him, he turns and points something at them (in hindsight, the captured taser but the cops couldn't know it wasn't a real gun) and according to some others (my eyes can neither confirm nor deny) fires it at them. Yes, he was running but taking a shot at them trumps running away.
 
The officers checked him for weapons, found none. He failed a breathalyzer, so they tried to arrest him even though he was not driving while drunk. He resisted, broke free
punched a police officer, stole a taser and used it against the pursuing cops you forgot to add.

Tried to use the taser and missed. So they shot an unarmed drunk guy running away from them

Given the timing I think the cop fired because a gun-like object was pointed at him. In the dark it would be awfully hard to tell a taser from a gun.
 
Imo, the violence, the sacking and the resignation seem unnecessary and unjustified in this case.

Beyond that, there is definitely a problem with policing if police feel that they need to shoot someone in these circumstances.

The backlash likely has more to do with the fact that tensions are currently so heightened.

The main point is that no one should be killed by police after falling asleep in their car. Our police are obviously horribly untrained.

It would help if your side didn't continually misframe the situations. He was not killed for falling asleep. He was killed for shooting at a cop.
 
Back
Top Bottom